For gaming you have your priorities wrong. Anyway.. you can bet all you want will come at the same time probably with 3D as well, as 3D TV will probably be a reality to the mass market.

In fact, since DX9, DX has been being developed precisely towards ease of use, especially in the concept of shaders (unification, simplification, etc).

This.

"Designed towards ease of use" does not imply "no hurdles in switching."

And for anything in programming, being designed for "ease of use" is entirely context sensitive on precisely what and how you plan on using it. If you're using it in the conventional means it wants you to, then yeah, you'll have ease of use. If you're trying to do anything in a more unique way, or setting things up in your own style due to specific problem specifications (something that Bethesda seems to do a lot of with their tech in general), then being designed for "ease of use" can actually get in the way more than if it had just been designed without.

Its not a problem of confort, its a problem of limitation, had they not the console limitation you can bet it would be DX11 compatible it gives so much more possibilities and performance it ain t fun. You would probably have a Crisys 1 lvl of dinamics and gfx.
And with this kind of thinking we would still be hunting with clubs, dying of a broken bone and living in caves. In sum, your kind of attitude is a denominator when human evolution is at stake.

You're assuming that denying an advancement one time is denying an advancement at all times. Not switching to DX11-compatibility in this particular case, to Bethesda, may have benefits that outweigh the consequences. But that by no means infers that those same benefits will outweigh those same consequences for the next game.

In sum, your kind of argument is an obscurer of premises.

According to the somewhat rediculously named PC Gaming Alliance, sales of PC games rose 19% last year - according to steam they took almost 1 billion dollars of money (70% of which went to the publisher/developers). According to intel, sales of gaming-class graphics cards well outstripped sales of gaming consoles over the past 6 years. Making the PC version better will not reduce sales, the market is there.



Absolutely, adding it in so close to release would be... inadvisable - however that's no reason for it not to have been built with this in mind from the start.

It all depends of how much traumatic is to switch from DX 9 to 11. Does it is?

Of course, it'd depend if you want the game to use DX11 features fully, or just enable it. I'd be happy even with the last option.



I think that just creating a shader without having to specify or worry if it's a Vertex or a Pixel Shader (for example) enters in my definition of "general ease of use".

Here's a vote for OpenGL instead. Available on ALL operating systems and not just Win7.

DX 11 ain't all that.

http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX

"...OpenGL gives you direct access to all new graphics features on all platforms, while DirectX only provides occasional snapshots of them on their newest versions of Windows. The tesselation technology that Microsoft is heavily promoting for DirectX 11 has been an OpenGL extension for three years. It has even been possible for years before that, using fast instancing and vertex-texture-fetch..."

This is very true, but likely not going to happen, as nice as it would be.

I expected Dx11... I would get very disapointed if its not implemented...

Well, I'd also be a bit dissapointed, but also impressed with what they've managed to do with DX9...If consoles have anything good is that they force devs to optimize their engines to the max, in order to make impressive games in such low hardware conditions.

Still, there's little reason not to include DX11 support...Crysis 2 has it, and it's being released for consoles, too.

Slapping on Dx11 won't do a thing. The game has to be developed with Dx11 from the start. Skyrim's development started way before Dx11 was even announced.

DX11 is almost on par with OpenGL now. The only obvious downside for many is that DX11 doesn't support XP, Linux, or Mac (for obvious reasons).

In all honesty even if OpenGL is still better, a non-profit organization isn't going to be able to compete with the juggernaut that is Microsoft. The same thing applies with Unlimited Detailed versus Nvidia and ATI's polygon system.

Will Skyrim have some sort of DX11 support? Possibly, but the only game that will really use DX11 will be Battlefield 3 at this point. This won't be something that BGS worries about until the main product itself is finished.

I have a feeling Valve might be using OpenGL for Source's successor. It would be a logical move, as they're porting most of their leading titles to other platforms. If so, that would quite possibly be the largest boost to OpenGL's market shares and overall industry perception in its history.

Whatever the case with Creation may be, I doubt we'll be disappointed. It may not, in its current form, look as good as Crysis 2, but I'm not really that fussed. Like others have said, it's quite nice to see what DX9 is capable of. I mean, I saw ATI's old techdemos for the X1800 series back in 2005/2006, and that was a lot prettier than a lot of recent DX9 games. I also say "in its current form" as I'm convinced the modding community will add their touches to the game not too long after its release.

Oh, I get it. If it's not feasible to have DX11 support by launch then the game just shouldn't be released at all?

And you have the audacity to say my priorities are wrong? Go [censored] yourself.

Didn't know graphics held a much higher priority over gameplay and a timely release.

But OpenGL is certainly better than DX9 and DX10. If other companies would stand behind OpenGL and support it, it would continue to grow with more and better features than DX. Unlikely, but possible.

But, truthfully, this is irrelevant. Bethesda's Creation Engine is DX all the way. DX11 would be nice.

I remember reading what an admin posted about there being no current plans for a Mac/Linux version, so hopefully we will get DX11 for its awesome features, but I am not holding my breath.

I have to ask, have any of your programmed with DirectX before, or at least wrote your own shaders? <_<

This thread smells like one big fart.

Correct me if I am wrong, but they will build an OpenGL version because it has been confirmed that it is going to be released for PS3. In any case it's not going to be DX on PS3.

That's a fair question. No, I have not done any serious programming with DirectX beyond merely toying around with it. I have played around with shaders, but haven't produced anything noteworthy.
So is my anolysis for the particulars of DX11 or DX in general particularly weighty and conversation-ending? No, it is not.

That said, are the questions I raise applicable to all APIs and programming in general? Yes, I believe they are.

Further, let me ask a question in return: Have any of you programmed with DirectX within a full professional environment before? Meaning that you've dealt with, not just learning and practicing DX to suit particular goals for mods or custom projects (however ambitious they may be), but implementing it within the sea of design decisions, problem specifications, hordes of other systems, etc, etc, and all the things that come with producing a fully-fledged product?

EDIT: Clarification, I meant 'haven't done any serious programming with directx,' not 'haven't done any serious programming.'

This thread smells like one big fart.

Sorry that was me... :whistling:

I am really talking about this from a PC context, and I am not really sure what API is used on PS3. I always thought it was PS3 specific, but loosely OpenGL based.

But I really do not know for sure. :shrug:

That's the gist I have as well. Not sure why they wouldn't have gone totally OpenGL. Surely a platform specific API in this scenario is just a bad idea for many reasons. :/

I'm not sure if that question was directed at me or not? I did not state any fact or opinion regarding the topic of discussion that would lead you to believe I have relevant experience, nor would my post gain any weight from such a background. Thanks for your candor though!

I do know a few people who work with OpenGL and DirectX regularly for work and honestly at that level they're genuinely excited for the new features when the DirectX API gets updated, I'm sure it takes a bit of practice but when your full time job is programming this stuff, it starts to come pretty easily.