What is Digg?237 Comments
- DeusGear, on 11/09/2007, -4/+81How disappointing, isn't DX10 API supposed to increase performance even if theres no new visual upgrades...
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -29/+97Developers should use open standards: - http://www.opengl.org/ - http://www.openal.org/ - Avoid the Abusive Monopolist's vendor lock-in trash. They also need to remove the highly offensive DRM infection.
- xappie, on 11/09/2007, -1/+60Interesting read.
Wonder if they even TRIED to make visual improvements for DX10, or if they just changed the renderer code and called it a day? - watership, on 11/12/2007, -11/+61Let me sum up previous reactions to Direct X versions:
DX9 sucks
DX8 sucks
DX7 sucks
DX6 sucks..
etc etc. - fatadamblog, on 11/09/2007, -18/+67DirectX10 was just a ploy to lure people to Vista and it didn't work.
And continuing to disappoint people is just going to make matters worse. - Phocion55, on 11/09/2007, -5/+49The difference between DX9 and DX10 is astounding, according to Microsoft.
Here's a great example: Prepare yourself for a good laugh (at the bottom of page)
.....
http://www.gamesforwindows.com/en-US/AboutGFW/Page ... - somecallmeTim, on 11/09/2007, -5/+38After all the "DX10 will blow you away and make babies cry" hype, I am yet to be impressed, and even disappointed a bit. Then again, did developers actually *fully* implement DX9? One would expect better performance and better visuals with DX10. The article lets me know that there is some work ahead for DX10 to come close to it's hype.
- bballbackus, on 11/09/2007, -20/+49Bury me.
- 1iProd, on 11/09/2007, -5/+33DUKE NUKEM FOREVER IS NOT A HOAX. IT'S COMING, I KNOW IT IS.
- TheNik, on 11/09/2007, -12/+37Wasn't Gears originally developed for the DX10-lacking Xbox 360? Why is this news?
Crysis has proven DX10 works the way it should. The system requirements may be insanity, but at least it looks fantastic. (I am a Mac user, by the way, which means it doesn't really matter - I can't play them.) - john2kx, on 11/09/2007, -1/+26You weren't lying... they actually tried to compare Halo 1 to Crysis... :O
- MioTheGreat, on 11/09/2007, -0/+19Halo 2 did not use DX10. It used DX9Ex.
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -0/+18it rocked
- paulbyrnes, on 11/08/2007, -4/+22I tried in vain, but up you go.
All you need to do is try to advertise something.
"Hey check out this great site" www.*****.com - frgmstr, on 11/09/2007, -1/+19I own both and both have their strong points for sure. PC gaming is not going to die as long as there are PCs.
- spyd3rweb, on 11/07/2007, -8/+25DX10 = marketing ploy for Windows Vista.
- EntropyFan, on 11/09/2007, -17/+34Do you code for a living? I like OpenGL (and have used it on some projects), but DX is simply better-faster-cheaper as an all around solution, as long as your willing to target only +90% of the computers out there.
Crysis shows DX 10 at around its best (so far). As more developers code to it (and not treat it as the exception), DX 10 will improve. - Phil1ip123, on 11/09/2007, -7/+23And even in Crysis the differences between DX9 very high, and DX10 very high are basically negligible.
- FredSpeaking, on 11/09/2007, -0/+14id seems to do alright with GL...
- spyd3rweb, on 11/09/2007, -6/+20why is he getting buried, the config hacked dx9 crysis looks exactly the same as it does under dx10.
- l2OI3, on 11/09/2007, -2/+16Am I the only one that noticed it takes 12 gigs of hard drive space??? Holy *****, not too long ago that was 1/4 of my windows partition.
- SpaceParanoids, on 11/09/2007, -2/+15What did they say about DX5?
- Dustmuffins, on 11/09/2007, -0/+13Got some bench numbers for us?
- dagamer34, on 11/09/2007, -1/+14Text should be replaced with "Difference between 2001 and 2007 graphics" and then a footnote that says "***** OBVIOUS".
- Wartz, on 11/09/2007, -6/+19Let me sum up previous reactions to Windows versions:
3.1 sucks
95 sucks
98 sucks
2000 sucks
ME sucks
XP sucks
Vista sucks.
They ALL sucked at the start of their life span. - Dustmuffins, on 11/09/2007, -2/+15But premium doesn't make it go slower...
- bluechocobo42, on 11/07/2007, -2/+15Honestly, I think it is that people have not quite yet grasped the concept of the Unified Shader Archecture, nor have completely optimized drivers been written (expecially in the case of rendering to texture, which is a very important process in modern graphic effects such as bloom and HDR, is much slower due to the switch to Kernel Mode on the flush in Vista as opposed to older versions of windows) In theroy, DX10 should outperform DX9 by quite a bit, as many CPU intensive tasks (Collision detection, billboarding) can be done on the GPU via shaders. If you check out the developer's section of NVidia's website (specifically http://developer.download.nvidia.com/SDK/10/direct ... ) you can see that these techniques exist (smoke demo, soft particles, deformable body collision detection on the GPU), but I have yet to see them implemented widely in any game.
- Guspaz, on 11/09/2007, -1/+14Except, that wasn't the reaction. When DX7 came out with the GeForce cards (, the addition of hardware T&L had an immediate performance enhancement; what wasn't to like?
When the GeForce 3 came out with DX8 support, the addition of pixel shaders made immediate (in games that supported them) improvements in visual quality.
When the Radeon 9700 came out with DX9 support, it DOUBLED the performance of the previous best. Even though nothing used DX9 for a while, nobody really minded, since the Radeon 9700 was so fast. And when DX9 games eventually did start coming out, the huge increase in shader flexibility (if only due to the increase in maximum length) slowly made itself felt.
I don't think that with any of the previous revisions, that large numbers of people started deriding them right away. If anything, people whined that it took so long to get games out that supported it.
And yet, here we are with the first slew of DX10 games. They look the same, and they run slower. That's a first. - serpentor, on 11/09/2007, -4/+17And ME sucked at the END of its life span, what's your point?
- zmjone2992, on 11/09/2007, -1/+13also it never said it required dx10 just vista.
- hobbitaussie, on 11/09/2007, -1/+13That is so sad.
- TonyCubed, on 11/09/2007, -2/+14Sorry, but if you design a game on a dx9 api and put some dx10 code in, it wont make it lighting fast, or see much improvement at all. Give us a native dx10 game, and we might see something special.
- AceGoober, on 11/09/2007, -0/+11I'm impressed with the game but not with the DX10 performance or lack of visual quality differences with DX10 on or off.
- inactive, on 11/07/2007, -3/+14http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advoc ...
40,000+ posts and counting. 11,000+ comments to Digg and counting. You seem completely trapped by your own "freedom". - benitojuarez, on 11/09/2007, -19/+30 I know its fashionable to bash both microsoft and sony here but its understandable dx10 titles arent blowing people out of their socks. I mean its a new api you cant expect the developers to know all the tricks right out the gates. Look at the ps3 with their cell architecture Any game that comes out on multiplatforms follows the same trend for the most part. Pc/360/wii version released. 1 week - 3 months later ps3 version released. People dont know ho to code for cell ( or dx10) yet but once they figure it out there might actually be some games worth playing (crysis for pc, i dunno anything comparable for ps3). Is this getting through? The same thing happens with every new incarnation of direct x.
- Guspaz, on 11/09/2007, -0/+10The difference is that the first DX8 or first DX9 games at least LOOKED better than their predecessors, even if they didn't run as well.
It has never happened, to my knowledge, that the majority of early games for a new version of DirectX look exactly (or almost exactly) the same, and run far worse.
It doesn't really matter, though, as long as developers keep producing DX9-compatible renderers. The newest batch of DX10 cards make very good DX9 cards. - Negyxo, on 11/09/2007, -3/+13current top of the line still unreleased code vs. 6+ year old code
wow dx10 is amazing! - shawnanigans, on 11/12/2007, -4/+14Stick with OpenGL.
- HAKdragon, on 11/09/2007, -1/+10You do realize the Mac port will use OpenGL, right?
- themastersb, on 11/09/2007, -1/+10Play with DirectX 9 and you experience better fps and no loss of quality. Should be XPs slogan
- Serenikill, on 11/09/2007, -3/+12Seems like this is more a problem with the Unreal 3 engine then dx10 as noticeable differences have been found elsewhere.
- Salgat, on 11/09/2007, -0/+9Noticed 0 differences.
- stubear, on 11/09/2007, -8/+17Time Machine, the improved Finder and Spaces could have all been added to Tiger without breaking a sweat. Is Apple an evil corporation for not giving away new technology as an update to the current OS? If not then why is Microsoft evil for doing the exact same thing? Quit being a ***** douche bag and shut the hell up.
- Amazetbm, on 11/06/2007, -1/+9Okay. Considering that Vista requires more hardware resource than XP, it just seems like the OS would sort of "get in the way". I really wish that MS had DX10 for XP.
- bwpayne, on 11/09/2007, -2/+10You made your own quote box.
- Ademan, on 11/07/2007, -0/+8The funny thing is, DX5 was the last version of DirectX that really DID suck lol.
- XtremeBug, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9Partition != Hard Drive
- wilf_brim, on 11/06/2007, -0/+7OK, point made. I can see some differences (mild) but only when the two screenshots are put side by side. I don't think that I would really be able to notice any difference when I was playing the game. Except, of course, the HUGE drop in performance when DX 10 is implemented. Look at those graphs. There are plenty of places where then framerate drops well below 30, into the "slideshow" area. Ugh. Right now the hardware just isn't up to DX 10, especially given the very marginal improvement in visual quality that you get for the huge decrement in overall system performance. Ugh.
- Amazetbm, on 11/06/2007, -4/+11Serious question. Is Vista hindering DX10's performance or does it just suck period?
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -3/+10Known crapflooder [quote] http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advoc ...
Buried. -
Show 51 - 100 of 236 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is