Hi all,

This thread is not about C2 not supporting DX11 atm it is about DX11 in general, it functions, and future.

Dx11 offers much more then Dx9 ( tesselation, deffered lightning, displacement mapping, multi threading etc etc etc.)

Now for the people that want more info about it I recommend u guys to view the Pdf file of battlefield 3 ( http://publications.dice.se/attachments/GDC11_DX11inBF3_Public.pdf ), it says what and how it will be used but the interesting stuff is :

( page 33) Still No performant drivers avaible for their use...

I believe dx11 is great, but for it to fully be supported in every feature we will have to wait 1 year I suppose.

If you want DX11, try 3DMark 11. It has full DirectX 11 support, but it's just a PC testing software, also not a techdemo. You can't play, just watch. It runs about 15 FPS on a single ASUS ENGTX460.

Call of Pripyat and a few other games have DX11 support, the API is there for developers.

Even if it wasn't ready, DX10/10.1 is a decent jump from DX9.

I think Battlefield 3 will truly show the potential of DX11.

I think Battlefield 3 will truly show the potential of DX11.


It will cause it will be DX 11 ONLY! :>

Dx10 is also in it, however I understand by previous info that dx10 and 10.1 normally is a part of dx11

Try Metro 2033?

True, but except square things are round i didn't notice any difference actually.. it was like very little tesselated everything

Or it could be me ofc =)

Try Metro 2033?

Metro 2033 has some of the finest lightning I've ever seen in games. Also Advanced Depth of Field is beautiful. The game has some bad textures now and then, though. The outside levels are quite mediocre. Also, the faces are very simplistic.

DX11 is ready. It's the developers that svck and never build games around it. Merely tacking on some features as an afterthought.

Wait for BF3 to see a real DX11 game in action.

The entire Direct X version discussion is really interesting. I know we all wanted C2 to support it, but C2 is a great game as it is, and I'd far rather they spend their time fixing other bugs before implementing something the majority of people can't use yet.

Jumping back to the topic... DX11 isn't really version 11, just a sort of beefed up DX10.1, and jumping from one version number to the next without a serious refinement of features and standards seems so odd. This practice is something that Microsoft seems to enjoy; Windows 7 is infact a newer version of Windows 6 when you break it down to the actual build numbers.

My guess is that it's the idea of constantly seeming fresh and new, and wanting people to buy more stuff, afterall, doesn't a graphics card that now supports DX11 sound like a much bigger leap than one that supports DX10.2?

When it comes to actual game implementation, it'll probably be a few years before the features of DX10/10.1/11 become totally commonplace, with the console market being so dominent, and consoles having pretty crap specs compared to PCs, devs that target consoles (one that I really am sad to see Crytek do) will probably never start unlocking the true power that PC gaming has, certainly not until the next generation of consoles hit the market, and then we'll get stuck on whatever DirectX version is the latest at the time for another 4 or 5 years.

11 makes more sense than 10.2 from a marketing standpoint, it's just a way of making the versions easier to tell apart for dumb consumers.

Of coourse its ready its just the developers cba to use it.

Try Metro 2033?

Metro 2033 has some of the finest lightning I've ever seen in games. Also Advanced Depth of Field is beautiful. The game has some bad textures now and then, though. The outside levels are quite mediocre. Also, the faces are very simplistic.

The smoke and other atmospheric effects are great too and the motion blur is pretty well implemented, but i agree with you on the textures and outdoor environments. THQ is promising that Metro 2034 will be "mind-blowing", we'll see if it lives up to that claim.