billdotson
March 9th, 2007, 04:54 PM
As probably most of you know the release of Vista was supposed to usher in the "next-gen" of PC gaming. These sort of statements mostly seem to be backed up by the new features that make PC games easier on Vista than any Windows OS before it.. here is a few for example:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/games.mspx (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/games.mspx)
Apart from the new ease-of-use features the big thing is Direct3D10 which is now in the DirectX suite. [ I personally do not know if Direct3D10 is the only updated API in the DirectX suite and am not claiming to, but I would assume that they would have updated the other APIs in there. ]
It claims to be able to do much more than DirectX9 can and make PC games go "next-gen"
The biggest proponent that Direct3D10 will revolutionize PC games is the game Crysis, who's stunning visuals awed many people when the first screens and trailers were released. Although, just recently screens of Crysis running in DirectX10 have been released. That means that the screens seen earlier that were so amazing were running w/ DX9, not DX10 (although they may have been trying to emulate DX10 somehow).
There are those that have already "upgraded" to Vista and purchased a Direct3D10 capable video card so they should be ready for the "next-gen of PC games" but what about those who are fine w/ their games now?
I personally think that Microsoft could have developed DirectX10 so that it would work with XP and Vista but they did not in order to force the adoption or faster adoption of Vista. I do not know technically if Direct3D10 works "so well" (as I have seen no DirectX10 games yet) because they made it with the integration with Vista in mind. Maybe they wanted it to be integrated into Vista only and not XP so there would be less bugs, etc. but I still think they could have included it as SP for XP.
I have heard that DirectX is used by Windows, the Xbox and the X360 but all the other games that are not on those platforms use the OpenGL and OpenAL APIs. I do not know if this is true but if the price of developing games keeps going up developers can't keep making DirectX games and then porting them to OpenGL + OpenAL and vice versa. Do you think that Direct3D10 will be the "gaming revolution" that it claims to be, will the games be the same as last gen with graphical upgrades or will it not be very popular at all?
Will game developers even bother to program Direct3D10 games at all or will it take them 2-3 years before they see it as profitable?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/games.mspx (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/games.mspx)
Apart from the new ease-of-use features the big thing is Direct3D10 which is now in the DirectX suite. [ I personally do not know if Direct3D10 is the only updated API in the DirectX suite and am not claiming to, but I would assume that they would have updated the other APIs in there. ]
It claims to be able to do much more than DirectX9 can and make PC games go "next-gen"
The biggest proponent that Direct3D10 will revolutionize PC games is the game Crysis, who's stunning visuals awed many people when the first screens and trailers were released. Although, just recently screens of Crysis running in DirectX10 have been released. That means that the screens seen earlier that were so amazing were running w/ DX9, not DX10 (although they may have been trying to emulate DX10 somehow).
There are those that have already "upgraded" to Vista and purchased a Direct3D10 capable video card so they should be ready for the "next-gen of PC games" but what about those who are fine w/ their games now?
I personally think that Microsoft could have developed DirectX10 so that it would work with XP and Vista but they did not in order to force the adoption or faster adoption of Vista. I do not know technically if Direct3D10 works "so well" (as I have seen no DirectX10 games yet) because they made it with the integration with Vista in mind. Maybe they wanted it to be integrated into Vista only and not XP so there would be less bugs, etc. but I still think they could have included it as SP for XP.
I have heard that DirectX is used by Windows, the Xbox and the X360 but all the other games that are not on those platforms use the OpenGL and OpenAL APIs. I do not know if this is true but if the price of developing games keeps going up developers can't keep making DirectX games and then porting them to OpenGL + OpenAL and vice versa. Do you think that Direct3D10 will be the "gaming revolution" that it claims to be, will the games be the same as last gen with graphical upgrades or will it not be very popular at all?
Will game developers even bother to program Direct3D10 games at all or will it take them 2-3 years before they see it as profitable?