DirectX engine

[bechmads]

Hey all subfreaks(including myself)

I was just wondering which DirectX engine SH4 will demand? do any of you know that? I personally think that Ubisoft wants everybody to be able to play the game which means that they'll just use the DirectX 9.0c.

See all of you in the pacific:D :rock:

[StandingCow]

Hey all subfreaks(including myself)

I was just wondering which DirectX engine SH4 will demand? do any of you know that? I personally think that Ubisoft wants everybody to be able to play the game which means that they'll just use the DirectX 9.0c.

See all of you in the pacific:D :rock:

Oh, I feel safe in saying, absolutely. The DX10 boom hasn't started yet.

[TDK1044]

I agree. Silent Hunter 4 is a Direct X 9.0 game.

[GSpector]

Keep your eyes out for DX9L. This will be a stripped down version of DX10 but made for XP. :D

This will allow players to take advantage of some of the DX10 features without having to upgrade to VISTA :up:

[TDK1044]

Yes. My understanding is that Vista isn't initially being released with DX10, but DX9 Longhorn. I think that DX9L is essentially an updated version of DX9 that supports Vista's Aeroglass.

[Gizzmoe]

Keep your eyes out for DX9L. This will be a stripped down version of DX10 but made for XP. :D

This will allow players to take advantage of some of the DX10 features without having to upgrade to VISTA :up:

Unfortunately that´s not true:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=399915&postcount=26

[GSpector]

Hello,

True enough,

I just read from M$ Rep that DX 9.0Ex (was known as DX9.0L) will NOT be available for XP after all. M$ is standing behind the wish to have everyone upgrade to VISTA by not allowing DX10 games to run on XP.

Good news for those that want Crysis, it is designed for DX 8,9 & 10 http://www.bombs-away.net/forums/images/smilies/banana.gif

I could find no proof that M$ has any interest in upgrading DX for XP http://www.bombs-away.net/forums/images/smilies/disappointed.gif

[AJ!]

Mircosoft are being quite brutal with their jump to Vista...

Many games are being made exclusive for Vista with no XP compatible version.

Bill seems like quite an evil guy... apparantly he stole the whole personal computer idea from some one, and there was a video on youtube about the complete rip off Vista did on Macs OS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT6YO30GhmQ

:down:

[fredbass]

Mircosoft are being quite brutal with their jump to Vista...

Many games are being made exclusive for Vista with no XP compatible version.

Bill seems like quite an evil guy... apparantly he stole the whole personal computer idea from some one, and there was a video on youtube about the complete rip off Vista did on Macs OS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT6YO30GhmQ

:down:

It's just a comical look at comparing the similarities between Mac OS X and Vista. Nothing else really. Actually Microsoft did the right thing by making Vista similar.

And I really couldn't care less who gets the credit as long as the right changes are made. :know:

[bookworm_020]

Vista is proof that Apple is at the front of GUI design and useablity! All thoese who bought Vista better be ready for the first lot of patches!!!

[fredbass]

Vista is proof that Apple is at the front of GUI design and useablity! All thoese who bought Vista better be ready for the first lot of patches!!!

I don't mind installing patches. :lol: ;).

Though it won't cost me anything to get it, I'm going to wait a little while.

[Potoroo]

I just read from M$ Rep that DX 9.0Ex (was known as DX9.0L) will NOT be available for XP after all.
It was never going to be. That rumour was started by an online tech web site and retracted the next day. I posted the links in here ages ago.

M$ is standing behind the wish to have everyone upgrade to VISTA by not allowing DX10 games to run on XP.
DX10 is not just DX9 with a couple of extra features. It's part of a significantly different graphics/OS architecture. It is not the simple bolt-on job too many people simply assume it would be. DX10 on XP would require major surgery.

[nightdagger]

Mircosoft are being quite brutal with their jump to Vista...

Many games are being made exclusive for Vista with no XP compatible version.

Bill seems like quite an evil guy... apparantly he stole the whole personal computer idea from some one, and there was a video on youtube about the complete rip off Vista did on Macs OS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT6YO30GhmQ

:down:
Umm...Bill Gates didn't "steal" the idea. He payed the developer for the idea and used his marketing ski11z to get rich. Most of the things that he "ripped off" of OSX were ripped from something even earlier and are ubiquitous. The only difference is that now you won't have to install a 3rd party app to get widgets, for example.

And as Potoroo said, the DX9.0L for XP was just a guess and it was wrong.

DirectX isn't the engine in any case, it's the framework for the engine. An engine might be like the Unreal 3 engine built on DX10.

[GSpector]

M$ has always taken ideas from others. Lotus 123 was a good spreadsheet app back in the 70's, and Bill Gates took that without permission and changed it somewhat. The creators of LOTUS 123 could not afford to fight it in court so they let it go.

Bill Gates really got his start with IBM creating IBM's DOS. Then changed it to MS-DOS taking it from IBM. Of course IBM's biggest mistake (and our benefit) was that they made the PC "Open architecture" allowing others to make changes and yet keep many things the same for compatibility purposes. Apple did not do this with any of there systems.

The Graphics User System M$ started using on Windows 3.1 was taken from Xerox when they saw a Xerox machine prototype that used a GUI system that they decided not to push forward with. M$ was not even there to see it, they were there to sell there systems only.

I have no doubt VISTA has similarities with MACs. M$ has had an on again off again relationship with them since they were both created. And Mr. Gates has always taken without giving. It was only a couple years ago that they finally merged. Anyone remember when INTEL "Moved out of the Box" campaign?

Any surprise now that there are similarities with MACs?

As far as fair practice, if you are planning on upgrading to VI$TA, I hope you don't have a Sound Blaster Audigy Card. Seems M$ wants to blame Creative for getting there codes to them sooner. As apposed to M$ supplying Creative with VI$TA with the OS so they would know how to create the drivers.

If I am not mistaken M$ is having legal issue in the UK about VI$TA having illegal methods in the software and with M$ trying to redo the entire internet by controling how information is used. MS wants to get rid of the HTML format in favor of their new format. Sun Microsystem is going to have a fun time with this.

For those with LINUX, the new DX10 video card WILL NOT WORK. DX10 Graphics Card are not and will not be compatible with any os other then VI$TA.

[geetrue]

So, a $150 for Vista to play a DX10 game, plus a miniumn of $300 for a DX10 pcie video card
(agp is out of the question) meaning if you don't already have a pcie capable motherboard that
will be another $100 bump ...

Say $500 to play a $50 game ... not me, no siree ...
I gotta eat and pay the rent every month ...

Didn't XP have problems till sp1 and sp2 came out?

I'll wait ... thank you for SH4 it's all I need till they get the kinks out of Vista

[Potoroo]

M$ has always taken ideas from others. Lotus 123 was a good spreadsheet app back in the 70's, and Bill Gates took that without permission and changed it somewhat. The creators of LOTUS 123 could not afford to fight it in court so they let it go.
Everybody takes good ideas no matter where they come from. You can't copyright or patent ideas, only the ways you implement them (except perhaps in the US Patent Office, the most incompetent of its type in the world).

Bill Gates really got his start with IBM creating IBM's DOS. Then changed it to MS-DOS taking it from IBM. Of course IBM's biggest mistake (and our benefit) was that they made the PC "Open architecture" allowing others to make changes and yet keep many things the same for compatibility purposes. Apple did not do this with any of there systems.
Yes, it was such a huge mistake that the IBM PC/Microsoft came to dominate the desktop. If Apple intended to become a bit player they went the right way about it.

The Graphics User System M$ started using on Windows 3.1 was taken from Xerox when they saw a Xerox machine prototype that used a GUI system that they decided not to push forward with. M$ was not even there to see it, they were there to sell there systems only.
No, it was Apple's Macintosh design team that visited Xerox's labs and walked away with lots of ideas that subsequently found their way into the Mac OS. So much so that when Apple sued Microsoft in 1988 over Windows' "look and feel" allegedly infringing on Apple's intellectual property, Xerox sued Apple!

Any surprise now that there are similarities with MACs?
All GUIs are similar. Windows, Max OS, X11/Motif, Gnome, etc... So what?

As far as fair practice, if you are planning on upgrading to VI$TA, I hope you don't have a Sound Blaster Audigy Card. Seems M$ wants to blame Creative for getting there codes to them sooner. As apposed to M$ supplying Creative with VI$TA with the OS so they would know how to create the drivers.
Vista completely did away with the old audio driver model. Microsoft not only ripped the audio driver out of the kernel and put it into user mode, they also totally rewrote it and in the process broke lots of things like EAX and Direct Sound's 3D hardware acceleration. Creative's "ALchemy Project" restores some things like EAX but it's still in beta and yes, currently only supports X-Fi cards. Then again, both ATI and Nvidia only released decent graphics drivers for Vista the day before its consumer launch. They're all having issues.

What you don't seem to understand is that Vista is 100% new code so it's not a case of just tweaking existing drivers. Audio, graphics, printer drivers, etc, all have to be written from scratch and work within a new paradigm that takes time for the programmers to learn.

If I am not mistaken M$ is having legal issue in the UK about VI$TA having illegal methods in the software and with M$ trying to redo the entire internet by controling how information is used. MS wants to get rid of the HTML format in favor of their new format. Sun Microsystem is going to have a fun time with this.
XAML's specs were released in 2004! There are even third party XAML development products. It's no more going to "get rid" of HTML than DHTML or XML. HTML needs to be improved, which is why Microsoft, along with a zillion others, is part of the W3C consortium.

For those with LINUX, the new DX10 video card WILL NOT WORK. DX10 Graphics Card are not and will not be compatible with any os other then VI$TA.
Bollocks. Where do you get this drivel from? The WINE guys are already working on porting D3DX10 so, as usual, it all comes down to someone doing Linux DX10 drivers for the cards themselves.

I'm all for giving Microsoft a kick when they deserve it but you seriously need to do a lot of homework.

[Gizzmoe]

DX10 is not just DX9 with a couple of extra features. It's part of a significantly different graphics/OS architecture. It is not the simple bolt-on job too many people simply assume it would be. DX10 on XP would require major surgery.
Yes, it now would require major surgery because it was never their goal to make DX10 XP-compatible. It could have been, relatively speaking, a simple bolt-on job if they´d decided to program DX10 in a different way.

[GSpector]

Vista for $150? Great price. Still don't want either but great price.


Prices found at CompUSA

Enterprise: Not available

Business:
$199.99 (upgrade) $299.99 (Full)

Home Basic:
$99.99 (Upgrade) $199.99 (Full)

Home Premium:
$159.99 (Upgrade) $239.99 (Full)

Ultimate:
$259.99 (upgrade) $399.99 (Full)

Ultimate Upgrade Signature Edition:
$289.99 (Full) Ships 1/30/07

Source: http://www.Compusa.com

[Potoroo]

DX10 is not just DX9 with a couple of extra features. It's part of a significantly different graphics/OS architecture. It is not the simple bolt-on job too many people simply assume it would be. DX10 on XP would require major surgery.
Yes, it now would require major surgery because it was never their goal to make DX10 XP-compatible. It could have been, relatively speaking, a simple bolt-on job if they´d decided to program DX10 in a different way.
You're right in that DX10 was never going to be XP-compatible. Microsoft wanted to move forward and they couldn't do that within the XP model. DX10 is also tied to the WDDM, something that simply doesn't and won't exist in XP. You're wrong to say it could have simply been programmed in a different way. It's not just an API. D3DX10 is intimately tied in with Vista's new driver model (which in turn is tied in with its new security model) and its new graphics model. They cannot be retrofitted to XP without ripping its guts out and rewriting it again - only Microsoft has already done that once with Vista and they're not going to do it again.

[Gizzmoe]

You're right in that DX10 was never going to be XP-compatible. Microsoft wanted to move forward and they couldn't do that within the XP model.
They couldn´t? No, they didn´t want to! It was a simple business decision, they want to force people, especially gamers, to upgrade to Vista. I´m not even complaining about that, it´s an understandable decision from a business viewpoint.

D3DX10 is intimately tied in with Vista's new driver model (which in turn is tied in with its new security model) and its new graphics model. They cannot be retrofitted to XP without ripping its guts out and rewriting it again
That´s because they decided early on not to make it XP-compatible. It´s just a wild guess, but if they´d invested 1000 man-hours and if they had pre-planned it we would already have D3D10 for XP.

[AJ!]

As long as Vista has a updated version of DX9 to hold me off having to get a DX10 card il be happy :up:

[Gizzmoe]

As long as Vista has a updated version of DX9 to hold me off having to get a DX10 card il be happy :up:

If you wanna use the DX10 features of a game you need a DX10 card (and Vista). AFAIK there´s currently no game in development that is DX10-only.

[AJ!]

So does anyone actualy know yet what DX10 has feature wise over DX9. From what i can see its not doing a whole lot more then DX9 did...

Crysis and UT2007 Both have DX10 features But both were built from the ground up on DX9 and they both look pritty good to me...

[StandingCow]

So does anyone actualy know yet what DX10 has feature wise over DX9. From what i can see its not doing a whole lot more then DX9 did...

Crysis and UT2007 Both have DX10 features But both were built from the ground up on DX9 and they both look pritty good to me...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX <- Good read there.

[GSpector]

Quote from GSpector:
"For those with LINUX, the new DX10 video card WILL NOT WORK. DX10 Graphics Card are not and will not be compatible with any OS other then VI$TA. "

Quotes from Potoroo:
"Bollocks. Where do you get this drivel from? The WINE guys are already working on porting D3DX10 so, as usual, it all comes down to someone doing Linux DX10 drivers for the cards themselves. "

"You're right in that DX10 was never going to be XP-compatible. Microsoft wanted to move forward and they couldn't do that within the XP model. DX10 is also tied to the WDDM, something that simply doesn't and won't exist in XP. You're wrong to say it could have simply been programmed in a different way. It's not just an API. D3DX10 is intimately tied in with Vista's new driver model (which in turn is tied in with its new security model) and its new graphics model. They cannot be retrofitted to XP without ripping its guts out and rewriting it again - only Microsoft has already done that once with Vista and they're not going to do it again. "

Ok, I'm confused. If DX10 drivers or cards are so tied to Vi$ta that they can not work in XP, then how is it that someone can make it work in LINUX?

I know NVidia tries to work with LINUX users but with the new agreement with all DX10 Card manufacturer, they had to agree to have the same capabilities in turn putting M$ in charge of when and what new features will be made. Do you really believe M$ will just give code to RED HAT?

If RED HAT has to hack the drivers to create their own DX10 drivers then what I said was true, M$ has no interest in making DX10 compatible with anything but VI$TA.

If RED HAT can pull it off without getting sued, then I don't see why someone else could not do it with XP. Either way, DX10 would have to be hacked to make it compatible with something other then VI$TA.

[Potoroo]

Quote from GSpector:
Ok, I'm confused. If DX10 drivers or cards are so tied to Vi$ta that they can not work in XP, then how is it that someone can make it work in LINUX?
I suspect the reason for your confusion is that DX10 has more than one component and unless you're aware of the model then it may not be clear what is being talked about.

DX10 has both hardware and software components. In the case of the question about DX10 cards and Linux the question is about hardware, and the answer is anyone can in principle write a driver for a DX10 compliant card for any OS. After all, that is precisely what a driver is - it's an extention of the OS that takes care of the nitty gritty of dealing with a given device. What you subsequently do with the card once you've got a driver for it is another issue altogether. You don't have to use it with the DX10 software. For example, you can run OpenGL applications on a DX10 compliant card once you've got a driver. However, certain parts of DX10 have been optimised and built-into the hardware because that greatly increases performance, and non-DX10 applications won't necessarily use them.

The main software component of DX10 is DirectX 10 (D3DX10). That's the API that applications use (just as SH3 uses the D3DX9 API). Older versions of DirectX are predicated on the 2D GUI Windows display model. D3DX10 is predicated on the new 3D GUI which is tied in with the new driver model, and that is where you run into non-trivial issues with retrofitting DX10 to XP. The Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) is now intimately tied in with D3DX10 in no small part because of issues with sharing a video card in 3D mode but also because the driver model has been completely restructured (and the security model and everything else - it's all completely new under the hood).

I know NVidia tries to work with LINUX users but with the new agreement with all DX10 Card manufacturer, they had to agree to have the same capabilities in turn putting M$ in charge of when and what new features will be made. Do you really believe M$ will just give code to RED HAT?
The tighter hardware specs were not imposed unilaterally by Microsoft. Microsoft consults regularly with ATI, Nvidia and with game developers. The thing Microsoft did which Nvidia in particular disliked was imposing the unified driver model on top of it but that's a separate issue. The tighter specs - the "same capabilities" - at the hardware level is a good thing, especially for developers. The third parties wanted it and had a lot of input about what it would look like.

If RED HAT has to hack the drivers to create their own DX10 drivers then what I said was true, M$ has no interest in making DX10 compatible with anything but VI$TA.
Providing DX10-card drivers for Linux is primarily down to whether Nvidia and ATI can be bothered. They'll do if there's sufficient demand. Third-parties can do it in principle but it's non-trivial.

[Seeadler]

I have a Asus 8800 GTX (a DX10 card) and it runs perfect on my PC with

1. Windows XP Pro and DirectX9c or OpenGL2.1
2. Windows Vista Ultimate and DirectX10
3. OpenSuSe Linux and OpenGL2.1

Nvidia has all the needed drivers for download :up:

[Cage]

I've been considering that it's time to start building myself another machine. This is the video card I was looking at. Would you mind posting your other specs, like MB, Processor and PSU?

I have a Asus 8800 GTX (a DX10 card) and it runs perfect on my PC with

1. Windows XP Pro and DirectX9c or OpenGL2.1
2. Windows Vista Ultimate and DirectX10
3. OpenSuSe Linux and OpenGL2.1

Nvidia has all the needed drivers for download :up:

[Roads88]

Business:
$199.99 (upgrade) $299.99 (Full)

Home Basic:
$99.99 (Upgrade) $199.99 (Full)

Home Premium:
$159.99 (Upgrade) $239.99 (Full)

Ultimate:
$259.99 (upgrade) $399.99 (Full)

Ultimate Upgrade Signature Edition:
$289.99 (Full) Ships 1/30/07


Quick queston, Are any or all of the above 64bit OS.

a guy on the board was saying he could not get SHIII to run on XP64.

I figured at least one of you guys would have this info off the top of your head.:ping:

thanks in advance.

[Seeadler]

I've been considering that it's time to start building myself another machine. This is the video card I was looking at. If you can still wait until ATI is on the market with their DX10, do this, because the prices will fall.;)

I bought my new PC last week because I need it urgently vocationally for multimedia productions and it's now a:
- Intel Core 2 Duo E6700
- EVGA nForce 680i SLI Mainboard
- 4 GB SDRAM-DDR2
- Asus 8800 GTX


Quick queston, Are any or all of the above 64bit OS.
a guy on the board was saying he could not get SHIII to run on XP64. All Windows Vista's includes both 32 and 64bit versions except the Systembuilder Versions here you can get only 32 or 64bit.

SHIII won't run on 64bit because Ubisoft don't support the 64bit StarForce driver in form of a patch or the removal of StarForce from SHIII;)

[Cage]

Thank you for the system information and great advice.

If you can still wait until ATI is on the market with their DX10, do this, because the prices will fall.;)
I bought my new PC last week because I need it urgently vocationally for multimedia productions and it's now a:
- Intel Core 2 Duo E6700
- EVGA nForce 680i SLI Mainboard
- 4 GB SDRAM-DDR2
- Asus 8800 GTX