That's what I said...the environments are TOTALLY different between the two games...that's why you can not compare them...

And I am saying the environments does not matter and the lighting between the two games can be directly compared.

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. =]

And I agree with your stance.

What do you mean you wouldnt hold your breath on more games with dx11? there are more games than I would buy with dx11. I have 2 (should be 3) games with dx11: JC2 and mafia 2.

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

Wow ! Now i can say: Crysis 2 with DX11 should be awesome !

It wouldnt look that perfect, but it would look BETTER THAN IT CURRENTLY IS which is the dumbed down reason everyone wants dx11

I am wrong about whay exactly?
You are wrong to say that stalker demonstrates effectively the benefits of tessellation because it most certainly does not.

Also phong tessellation is more common than displacement mapping using tessellation, that was the point. I might have used a word slightly out of place there big deal.

What do you mean you wouldnt hold your breath on more games with dx11? there are more games than I would buy with dx11. I have 2 (should be 3) games with dx11: JC2 and mafia 2.

Neither of those games are DX11 as far as I know. They are two of the best looking DX9 or 10 games though.

HAWX2 is the only full on DX11 game so far IMO. As regards the environments on levels where they implemented tessellation properly it has far and away the best graphics of any game on any platform.

Sorry, I got my dx11 and 3d mixed up because I was talking with a friend about 3d tvs. Anyways, theres LP2 shift 2 dirt 2 and i'm sure theres more. Point is, there are definitely going to be more dx11 games.

Sure those dx11 things can look pretty, but as the thread (which most of you probably didn't read) points out, its complete overkill for games. Seeing as crysis 2 doesn't have maps big enough to bother swapping out low polly distance models for higher polly closeup ones, the benefits from dx11 will be mostly placebo, or tiny tiny improvements to a few jagged edges (which you can't see while you're busy shooting stuff in the face anyway.)

And hawx 2 looks like crap.

cuz

I beg to differ pudge, there is plenty of room for distance models, at least 3 if not more LODs. Hardware tessellation is a big thing (combined with other dx11 features).

Obviously the OP is completely ignorant to gaming, especially "PC gaming". So why not just ignore him. That is the best way to get him to stop spewing his ignorance all of the internet.


TWOTHIRTYS3V3N

In the end, Gameplay wins ;]

Well, I have a DX11-gpu.....but I don't care much about DX11.

For me, a fluent game is more important than a great DX11-game, which has the framerate of a screenshot....The example is a bit extreme, I know. ^^

I played Dragon Age 2 in DX11, and I almost didn't see any difference. (Okay, DA2 isn't a game with great graphics like C2....the comparison svcks)

If I want to play in DX11, I think I'll need C2 64bit.

An option for playing with DX11 would be nice, though.

In the end, Gameplay wins ;]

Amen!

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.

Isn't it so that tesselation allows for a variable poly count in the sense that when you move closer to an object the geometry of it can be increased? So that increased geometry / high poly counts aren't as resource intensive anymore? I can understand textures have to be adapted for that, which could be a lot of work. But ultimately it would make things look better than some of the displacement mapping options right? As for the latter, if they won't give us tesselation I would really like to see POM return. And DX9 or DX11 I don't care but some higher res textures would be nice. As for shaders, do you have an example of the advances DX11 can bring?

I dont vote for dx11. Dx11 just like dx10 is just nice, catchy marketing slogan to put on gpu box and then every kid just....WOW. It has Dx11!
Look for Crysis 1 because its a good example. After editing config files you can achive exactly the same visual level under dx9 in xp as under dx10 in Vista. I can give another good example. We have Dragon Age 2 with Dx11. Does it make this game look nice? Is it better than Crysis 1 in dx9? I dont think so and everybody will agree. If you want to make revolutionary game in almost every aspect it has to be made on pc because its much more advanced platform. Look at our very old pc classic half - life 2. Despite the fact that it was made in 2004 which means it is 7 years old!!! its still a looker compared to many multiplatform games we have today.