Well, that, and that it's pretty much a standard nowadays.

It's kind of embarrassing that Crytek, the leader in PC graphics, released it's flagship title without basic DX11 support or graphics options.

Please DX 11 is not nor pretty much a standard, thats nonsense.

^^ hey jack@$$ if u dont like dx11 then stfu and gtfo........presence or absence of dx11 should not affect an ignorant hill billy like u

You ask why DX 11.....!!!!


Here is ur answer with example of the enhanced "OLD" Unreal Engine 3.....


http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=240675#p240675


Look at those Videos......

Funny thing is those features are still in development and there isn't an Unreal game that sport these features. Your point has been nullified.

Any 3D artist can tell you, tesselation is just an option that artists use to divide a triangle into 3 more triangles. It looks like ass on everything because it stretches textures and can sometimes ruin the UVW mapping of one. It doesn't on Nvidia's benchmarking tool because they designed it to do that so they could sell their product. Technically, all models have been under "tesselation" somehow, its called a smoothing tool in 3DS Max with a line of features that doesn't make things look like ass like the tesselation through DX11. If artists wanted, they could technically just hit the smoothing tool in 3DS Max when designing the model, but theres a reason why they don't, its because Poly counts aren't what make things look pretty, and costs more hardware wise.

The reason why Crysis looks better than something, like say Metro 2033 is because of the shader engine, not because of DX11 poly counts, not because of high-resolution textures. Shaders.

You are all graphical noobs, the reason why DX11 can be a big deal is because of shader advances, not because of higher poly counts and higher-res textures. Get the **** off the PC because you dont know what you're talking about.

First do some research. Yeah it will cost some frames but it does not destroy frame rate. This because the extra polygons only get rendered for objects close to you.

I think you are the one that really needs to do the research not I. Have you tried using DX11 tesellation feature?

geniusprime stfu and gtfo..............if you dont like dx11 y are u arguing with ppl who want it? Dont like it dont use it....nobody as to justify their expectations from the game to a jack@$$ like u

Well, that, and that it's pretty much a standard nowadays.

It's kind of embarrassing that Crytek, the leader in PC graphics, released it's flagship title without basic DX11 support or graphics options.
Thats because they've been working at Crysis 2 slowly since Crysis 1, why would they revamp so much for some stupid features that, honestly, don't do jack **** compared to the progress they can make on graphics while working on DX9

Honestly, they could say its running on DX11 and you stupid people wouldn't notice a difference, the game is still absolutely stunning. The game isn't designed (unlike crysis 1) to be a visual benchmark, its meant to BE A GAME. Stop treating it like a cum dumpster to your videocards.

You call us noobs yet you clearly have no idea why dx11 is significant for tessellation. It is true that tessellation is no new thing, but dx11 utilizes the dedicated tessellation unit in gpus. There is a reason that dx11 isnt just a software update..

Any 3D artist can tell you, tesselation is just an option that artists use to divide a triangle into 3 more triangles. It looks like ass on everything because it stretches textures and can sometimes ruin the UVW mapping of one. It doesn't on Nvidia's benchmarking tool because they designed it to do that so they could sell their product. Technically, all models have been under "tesselation" somehow, its called a smoothing tool in 3DS Max with a line of features that doesn't make things look like ass like the tesselation through DX11. If artists wanted, they could technically just hit the smoothing tool in 3DS Max when designing the model, but theres a reason why they don't, its because Poly counts aren't what make things look pretty, and costs more hardware wise.

The reason why Crysis looks better than something, like say Metro 2033 is because of the shader engine, not because of DX11 poly counts, not because of high-resolution textures. Shaders.

You are all graphical noobs, the reason why DX11 can be a big deal is because of shader advances, not because of higher poly counts and higher-res textures. Get the **** off the PC because you dont know what you're talking about.

Well done. Finally someone who actually knows why DX 11 is advantagous. That was more or less my point. Most people want DX 11 and they don't even know why. DX 11 does not automatically make a game better and its implementation requires more thought than just changing the rendering option becuase the real advantage is in its ability to create more complex shaders and the use of direct compute. These features have to be thoughfully implemented to mAke any visual difference. Tessellation in DX11 is currently sloppy becuase it triangulates and does not smooth with quads like in Max,Maya, Zbrush or Mudbox.

Call of Pripyat

Changing from DX9 to DX11 makes it a completely different experience.

CoP:
DX9 = static lighting
DX11 = real time lighting, tessellation, more realistic wet surfaces etc etc

Lightning looked incredible in Pripyat.

You ask why DX 11.....!!!!


Here is ur answer with example of the enhanced "OLD" Unreal Engine 3.....


http://www.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=240675#p240675


Look at those Videos......

Funny thing is those features are still in development and there isn't an Unreal game that sport these features. Your point has been nullified.


Sorry but we not discuss about a Game who is use this. So u are nullified...

Fact is, this is DX 11 looks like....AND Cryengine 3 can do the same on most Graphicfeatures i think (not know).

Sadly the high technology isnt appear at Cryteks Office........too expensive for only PC Users, i think...on the other hand---who knows how much bought this Game if it use such DX 11 Technology?
If u look at PC Users bought Game.......lol...not so much!

Just speak for me and at looking at Unigine Heaven Benchmark as a Example.......i love Tessalation most and other Features too...and of course my GPU 580 can run it at acceptable Frames!

So much about my Point about it....



Regards

Call of Pripyat

Changing from DX9 to DX11 makes it a completely different experience.

CoP:
DX9 = static lighting
DX11 = real time lighting, tessellation, more realistic wet surfaces etc etc

Lightning looked incredible in Pripyat.

Realtime lighting can be achieve in DX 9. And even with DX 11, Crysis 2 lighting is superior and it uses Dx9. As for tessellation this demonstrates the advantage in CoP. http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/50519/S-T-A-L-K-E-R-Call-Of-Pripyat-DirectX-10-DirectX-11-Comparison-Screenshots

this: http://www.overclock.net/ati/597046-dx11-vs-dx10-vs-dx-9-a.html

Tessellation. Thats a nice feature for destroying framerate.

Well that all depends if you get a rice burner or not

this: http://www.overclock.net/ati/597046-dx11-vs-dx10-vs-dx-9-a.html

Tessellation. Thats a nice feature for destroying framerate.

Well that all depends if you get a rice burner or not

Are you serious? Who doesn't have a rice burner?

The DX10 on your game for Crysis wars was used somewhat but not to where it could have because the servers ran DX9 and not 10. The DX10 servers were buggy and required a lot of server resources. They would have to change the server to run DX11 to get full DX11 capability so this would take time. Then developing the engine to use your GPU to its extent needs to be in place because lets just face it the half A**ed way EA did it in BC2 just didnt work nice. But it would be nice to have a 64bit exe but then again the 64bit broke PB but wait we dont have PB here. The 64Bit was more stable than the 32. But think about the work that has to be done. It will probably be added but its going to take time to make sure these work correctly and that its not crashing like hell.

Textures, thats a nice feature for destroying framerate. Hell, why arent we all playing pong

You can have high res textures in Directx 9. So whats your point again?

That is his point well done you just helped him make it.

Call of Pripyat

Changing from DX9 to DX11 makes it a completely different experience.

CoP:
DX9 = static lighting
DX11 = real time lighting, tessellation, more realistic wet surfaces etc etc

Lightning looked incredible in Pripyat.

Realtime lighting can be achieve in DX 9. And even with DX 11, Crysis 2 lighting is superior and it uses Dx9. As for tessellation this demonstrates the advantage in CoP. http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/50519/S-T-A-L-K-E-R-Call-Of-Pripyat-DirectX-10-DirectX-11-Comparison-Screenshots

You are wrong this is a type of tessellation, phong tessellation, it's pretty basic and is common because it involves almost literally no effort for the developers. When developers actually go to the effort of using displacement maps tessellation looks like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkKtY2G3FbU&feature=player_embedded

PS: If you have a good DX11 card you can run this bench or roam the environment at a good frame rate at extreme tessellation which is the highest level on the new version (they added a higher setting and some extra scenes I think this Youtube vid is the old version with less tessellation but it shows the difference well enough).

I don't care what anyone says, I would like the OPTION to run it in dx11.

Call of Pripyat

Changing from DX9 to DX11 makes it a completely different experience.

CoP:
DX9 = static lighting
DX11 = real time lighting, tessellation, more realistic wet surfaces etc etc

Lightning looked incredible in Pripyat.

Realtime lighting can be achieve in DX 9. And even with DX 11, Crysis 2 lighting is superior and it uses Dx9. As for tessellation this demonstrates the advantage in CoP. http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/50519/S-T-A-L-K-E-R-Call-Of-Pripyat-DirectX-10-DirectX-11-Comparison-Screenshots
It doesn't matter, in the game options of CoP, DX9 was CALLED Static Lighting mode, that is what I meant.

IMO CoP had way better lighting, whether it was refraction of lightning strikes through trees or simply the sun hitting the end of your gun. You can't really compare them, Pripyat had a dynamic weather cycle and non-solid architecture all around, including forests and lakes. Crysis 2 is linear with solid buildings and the occasional spotlight.

It doesn't matter, in the game options of CoP, DX9 was CALLED Static Lighting mode, that is what I meant.

IMO CoP had way better lighting, whether it was refraction of lightning strikes through trees or simply the sun hitting the end of your gun. You can't really compare them, Pripyat had a dynamic weather cycle and non-solid architecture all around, including forests and lakes. Crysis 2 is linear with solid buildings and the occasional spotlight.

Independent of your opinion, the lighting in Crysis 2 is superior. And when comparing lighting and quality of light, the environment does matter to a large extent. Good lghting is good lighting. And my point was simply that the dynamic lighting is not exclusive to DX11.

Whether DX9 can still generate fantastic graphics or not it is an antiquated technology and needs to become extinct, there's nothing to argue about.

You are wrong this is a type of tessellation, phong tessellation, it's pretty basic and is common because it involves almost literally no effort for the developers. When developers actually go to the effort of using displacement maps tessellation looks like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkKtY2G3FbU&feature=player_embedded

PS: If you have a good DX11 card you can run this bench or roam the environment at a good frame rate at extreme tessellation which is the highest level on the new version (they added a higher setting and some extra scenes I think this Youtube vid is the old version with less tessellation but it shows the difference well enough).


I am wrong about whay exactly? And tessellation is not common, that type of tessellation in general, maybe common if that is what you are refering to. The Unigine is a benchmark and a demo of tessellation. Using it as an example is pointless. It is just as meaningful as the many tech demos that are never used in games. Lets keep real people, most of these technologies would not become standard for a while. Probably at the end of the year we would start seeing more games with DX1 features but I woukd not hold my breath on that. And lets not forget ATI tesselllation performance to that of Nvidia cards. Also the framerate as you said is just good and that does not include other aspects like AI, Game logic among other things.

Whether DX9 can still generate fantastic graphics or not it is an antiquated technology and needs to become extinct, there's nothing to argue about.
Another jus cause argument.

It doesn't matter, in the game options of CoP, DX9 was CALLED Static Lighting mode, that is what I meant.

IMO CoP had way better lighting, whether it was refraction of lightning strikes through trees or simply the sun hitting the end of your gun. You can't really compare them, Pripyat had a dynamic weather cycle and non-solid architecture all around, including forests and lakes. Crysis 2 is linear with solid buildings and the occasional spotlight.

Independent of your opinion, the lighting in Crysis 2 is superior. And when comparing lighting and quality of light, the environment does matter to a large extent. Good lghting is good lighting.
That's what I said...the environments are TOTALLY different between the two games...that's why you can not compare them...

Psh, I'll say it... I want it because I have the hardware to run it and it's been out long enough. If that makes me a greedy bastard, whatever, give me some DX11! I'll gladly play the game under DX9, not like some of these people who throw their CDs at the wall and pout until they get what they want - but DX11 would be nice. =]