Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

DX10.1/11 - Do you care?Follow

#1 Feb 21 2010 at 2:02 PM Rating: Good
I've just started the process of a massive overhaul of my current PC (which is not a horrible one, I'm just ****** off at the company I bought it from for all the issues I've had with the low-grade components they used to build it). While drooling over the thought of a pair of Radeon 5870s, the main concern around these cards is that they're developed to take advantage of a standard that isn't really in common usage at this point (DX10.1/11).

SE has said that they want FFXIV to take advantage of current technology or, to word it differently, that what constitutes a "good" PC now will be able to run the game but a "good" PC five years from now will be even better. Personally, I'm a visuals junky. There isn't a ton of opportunity to compare the difference between DX9 and DX11, but I did find this site that has some comparison screenshots and one tech demo gameplay video that highlights the difference. The devil is in the details, and DX11 is shaping up to add a noteworthy level of refinement to the current standard.

So do you care if FFXIV ships with DX10.1/11 support right out of the box? Is it something that you'd be indifferent to at release but would want to see implemented further on down the line, or are you happy with current high-end PC graphics performance and would rather SE focus their development attention elsewhere?
#2 Feb 21 2010 at 2:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
For me, there's a point where graphics are "good enough". I think that while the DX11 adds some level of detail to the graphics, it's not that important to me anymore at that point. Of course the prettier it is the better, but I don't really mind either way.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#3 Feb 21 2010 at 2:20 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,808 posts
Couldn't care less about the shading, polygon count, etc. I remember when crisis came and was receiving a lot of attention for its graphics. I got the game free as part of a special offer, installed, and immediately thought to myself "this looks terrible; I've seen flash games that look better than this." An ultrahighresolution blade of grass is still just a blade of grass. The art and environment in Crisis was completely uninspired.

I'd rather have a tenth of the polygons if the artist would put even twice as much effort into art style and design.
#4 Feb 21 2010 at 2:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
660 posts
I think it goes without saying that all of us would like to see the game ship with the best possible WORKING graphics available. If that means sticking with DX10 for a while, that's fine, or if the game is able to ship with DX11 support, that's great too. Right now, I think the question is kind of irrelevant, since DX10 isn't being used very much (due to glitchiness and some devs feel that it is clunky and difficult to work with), and DX11 is only going to be supported by a mere handful of games coming out this year. The standard is still DX9, unfortunately. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Squenix skip over DX10 entirely to go straight to DX11.

I just want the game to be as polished at release as possible, and if that means using old architecture, that's fine with me. We can upgrade to DX11 in the future easily.
#5 Feb 21 2010 at 2:31 PM Rating: Excellent
**
736 posts
To put it visually.

I'd love to see it right out of the box. But I'll admit, my knowledge of programming is abysmal. I have no idea how difficult a dx9 to dx10/dx11 conversion would be, but something about this topic makes my programmer friends cringe. So I suppose I'll settle for a 'somewhere down the line'.


Edited, Feb 21st 2010 3:33pm by Zemzelette
#6 Feb 21 2010 at 2:41 PM Rating: Good
*
205 posts
In theory it would be awesome to have an MMO utilizing the latest & greatest technology for its graphics.

However, in practice it's probably better for an MMO to take a few steps back from "cutting edge graphics."

The more complicated the graphics need to be, the more time the artists need to create new armor. Keep in mind that adding just 1 new piece of armor to the game really means adding 8 peices of artwork (a graphic for each race, and another for each of the genders).

I don't want the release of new content to be delayed by 1.5 years just because the artists have to finely tune each graphic for those running the game settings on Very High w/ DX11.
#7 Feb 21 2010 at 2:41 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
214 posts
Although SE said they will be aiming to take advantage of high system PC, they also said they are aiming for DX9.

I would love to see the game ship with DX11 features, I will no doubt buy a new GPU a few weeks prior to the release of FF14, hopefully the radeon 6000 series will be out around by that time.

Saying that many of the assets will no doubt be a straight port to the PS3 and the 360 if/or when it happens, so the bigger the gap between the systems the harder it becomes for SE to provide a streamlined porting process for console players, its not realistic for them to create 2 sets of models and textures for ever object in the game. (especially in HD gaming, where game art is one of the biggest money sinks to a games budget)

Any one expecting the PC version to look many times better than the console version is kidding themselves though, there will be obvious differences like higher resolution, better frame-rate, better anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering (all of which are set by the user) but for the most part geometry and texture resolution will be the same for both version.

For me animation is a lot more important than impressive graphics, still many games fail on smooth animation which is too sad.

Edited, Feb 21st 2010 4:05pm by Diakar
____________________________

#8 Feb 21 2010 at 3:18 PM Rating: Good
(Nice comparison link Zemzelette Smiley: eek)

I've been doing some reading around DX10/11 and why there seems to be so little support for it. Apparently DX10 was a P.I.T.A. to code for because of various different platform issues. DX11 is sort of the, "Ya, we botched DX10 so let's rethink how we go about it" and is supposed to be much easier to support across a variety of hardware configurations (including but not limited to standards from nVidia and AMD).

It looks like nVidia is set to announce it's next generation of GPUs to compete with the 5000 series from AMD as early as tomorrow, which means AMD's stranglehold on top performance will be over and prices are likely to drop substantially on that performance bracket. In addition to the "meh" response DX10 got, DX11 support has been slowed based on the number of cards on the market (and in the machines of consumers) that can support it. Right now, an XFX Radeon 5870 retails in the $400 USD range, which is a bit much to spend on a GPU for the majority of people. If someone is keen on cutting edge graphics a lot of the time they aren't willing to take the all-around hit in performance for a lesser 5000 series card just so they can say they have a rig that supports DX11.

Also, Windows Vista was a severe disappointment for a lot of people who opted to stick with XP because old was better than crap. Windows 7 is receiving a lot of positive press (and rightly so, imo) which will likely draw a lot of steadfast XP users into the 21st century. (I was surprised at the number of people who seemed to be running XP on machines that could have easily handled Vista simply because Vista made them throw up in their mouth a little.)

I'm on the fence. Obviously, if I had no intention of upgrading my rig I would be less enthusiastic about the prospect of an MMO that truly pushes cutting edge technology. At the same time, it's not just about my rig. Something that I hadn't thought about until after I started this thread is what happens when you get people pushing their graphics settings beyond what their current rig can really handle and the resulting client lag and stutter means the game is functionally unplayable...but those 3 frames they're seeing every second are freakin' gorgeous... Being one of those people who loves a beautiful game, I hate feeling compelled to suggest to people in groups that they lower their graphics settings because their performance issues are putting a strain on the group's chances to succeed.
#9 Feb 21 2010 at 4:10 PM Rating: Good
***
2,614 posts
I was a bit disappointed when I found out that the game would only support DX9 (source interview). Not that the later DirectX versions really make much difference for the most part, and the features that would make a difference, like tesselation, wouldn't be supported anyway in a game bound to consoles. It's just that I like to buy nice hardware, and it's not much fun when the games I'll be playing won't take advantage of it.

That's kind of the problem with PC gaming as a whole right now... the graphics flagship is now two or three years old, with no improvement in sight.

I wonder what the odds are of them actually updating FFXIV's technology over time. If they don't feel it's necessary to support DX10 today when it's over 3 years old, I don't see them changing that in the future.

Graphics updates to FFXI were obviously nonexistent, but this time around PC seems to be the lead platform. For instance, in response to this:

Diakar wrote:
Saying that many of the assets will no doubt be a straight port to the PS3 and the 360 if/or when it happens, so the bigger the gap between the systems the harder it becomes for SE to provide a streamlined porting process for console players, its not realistic for them to create 2 sets of models and textures for ever object in the game.

The same interview I linked above actually says they will be using separate textures for the PS3/PC version. No mention of models, but since artists create high-poly models anyway and then scale them back for use in a game, it doesn't seem that far-fetched that they would implement them on the PC. Maybe in a couple years, when the hardware gap is wide enough to justify it.

Another reason it would be a good idea for them to upgrade the PC graphics over time is that it would let them do an updated port to the next generation of consoles when the time comes. FFXI on Xbox 360 might have been a little more appealing if it had updated graphics.
#10 Feb 21 2010 at 4:15 PM Rating: Decent
**
621 posts
I'm planning to buy a new computer around the time of FF14 launch, since it is about time anyway. But graphics are not the most important aspect for me - I still think FF11 looks great.
____________________________
Kweh?!

...prophesizing the golden patch since october 2010.
#11 Feb 21 2010 at 5:17 PM Rating: Good
Borkachev wrote:
Another reason it would be a good idea for them to upgrade the PC graphics over time is that it would let them do an updated port to the next generation of consoles when the time comes. FFXI on Xbox 360 might have been a little more appealing if it had updated graphics.


I agree. The last thing I think anyone wants to here...and particularly PC players...is an explanation for why FFXIV expansion #3 contains largely reskinned mob models because of the notorious "console limitations."

I noticed that of the games I've seen currently supporting DX11, they all also appear to be backwards compatible with DX9. Something like cloth tessellation makes a great deal of sense for a game where a lot of the characters will no doubt be adorned in cloth gear.
#12 Feb 21 2010 at 5:59 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
DX10 and DX9 are almost visually indistinguishable. Crysis was able to run even better on DX9c, despite DX10 'being required.' DX11, on the other hand, is a completely different animal, and a conversion from DX9/10 to DX11 would require an extensive rewrite of almost everything, or it wouldn't really be worth the actual change.


My opinion? DX11 would be fine, but considering all of the absolutely beautiful games that are still using DX9/10, I don't really care at this point in time.

But as SE has very clearly pointed out, the PC graphics are being seperated from the console graphics, giving SE the opportunity to completely revamp the graphics should need be. Will it be a conversion to DX11? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it.

If I remember correctly, DX11 runtime can actually be run on DX9 and DX10 cards, they just simply don't get the bells and whistles. I'm assuming they didn't go for DX11 simply because they were too far along already. But that doesn't mean that new areas and expansions might implement DX11 elements...

Edited, Feb 21st 2010 4:12pm by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#13 Feb 21 2010 at 6:35 PM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,078 posts
While an aesthetics junkie, I'm okay with DX9 despite not really knowing the ins and outs of it or later versions. So, really, it boils down to what gets us new content more quickly. I think we can all agree 4-5 months between sparse XI updates is horrible.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#14 Feb 21 2010 at 7:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
184 posts
Quote:
It looks like nVidia is set to announce it's next generation of GPUs to compete with the 5000 series from AMD as early as tomorrow, which means AMD's stranglehold on top performance will be over and prices are likely to drop substantially on that performance bracket



I hate to say it, but we're probably gonna be waiting on fermi for quite a while from the chatter I've heard on the web.
Read This and it might give you an idea of the the issues with fermi atm.


Also: Lotro has dx11 now, (or will soon, forgot when that went live) so I would hope that S/E could at least bring dx11 to us within a reasonable period after launch.

Edited, Feb 21st 2010 5:23pm by saiyandon
____________________________
Vanidin Pickles on Excalibur
#15 Feb 21 2010 at 7:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
214 posts
There are some comparisons of 9, 10 and 11 here
____________________________

#16 Feb 21 2010 at 7:37 PM Rating: Good
saiyandon wrote:
Quote:
It looks like nVidia is set to announce it's next generation of GPUs to compete with the 5000 series from AMD as early as tomorrow, which means AMD's stranglehold on top performance will be over and prices are likely to drop substantially on that performance bracket



I hate to say it, but we're probably gonna be waiting on fermi for quite a while from the chatter I've heard on the web.
Read This and it might give you an idea of the the issues with fermi atm.


Also: Lotro has dx11 now, (or will soon, forgot when that went live) so I would hope that S/E could at least bring dx11 to us within a reasonable period after launch.


Thanks for the link. A lot of the article was beyond me from a technical standpoint but it was enough to determine that whatever nVidia is announcing tomorrow, it isn't likely to impact the price of AMD GPUs in any substantial way. The downside, of course, is that until nVidia shows up on the market with viable DX11 GPUs, the lack of competition will keep AMD cards out of the hands of those who prefer to let price wars between nVidia and AMD save them a few bucks on the upgrade.

Edited, Feb 21st 2010 6:41pm by AureliusSir
#17 Feb 21 2010 at 8:07 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Diakar wrote:
There are some comparisons of 9, 10 and 11 here


mmm delicious displacement maps
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#18 Feb 21 2010 at 8:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
295 posts
Building a PC for DX11 won't help you with XIV.

on a side note, there is a video of dx 11 comparison on youtube. DX 11 would be so amazing to have, but that's getting ahead of ourselves. To reach the broadest demographic possible, I think they are going to be getting something in between HL2: OB and Crisis as far as quality is concerned.

#19 Feb 21 2010 at 8:40 PM Rating: Good
MetalSmith wrote:
Building a PC for DX11 won't help you with XIV.

on a side note, there is a video of dx 11 comparison on youtube. DX 11 would be so amazing to have, but that's getting ahead of ourselves. To reach the broadest demographic possible, I think they are going to be getting something in between HL2: OB and Crisis as far as quality is concerned.



I think that for SE to not at least have plans for a DX11 rollout at some point early in the game's lifespan would be a disappointment. It's pretty hard to announce a game in June of 2009 with a statement that they want to make use of cutting edge technology and then over a year later put out something that's still making use of DX9. If LOTRO has (or will soon have) support for DX11, SE really has no excuse. LOTRO isn't exactly thriving; if they have the time and development budget to add DX11 support, SE should be readily capable of it as well. I'd hate to think that we're all being sucked back into SE's historical cycle of saying one thing and then not delivering.
#20 Feb 21 2010 at 9:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
214 posts
Quote:
Building a PC for DX11 won't help you with XIV.


Well that really isn't true, DX11 cards are more powerful so you will be getting a decent boost in performance at least.

I really don't think SE will bother with DX11 though at least until the first expansion (if ever).

I get the feeling SE are pretty lazy when it comes to this kind of stuff, they always said that FF11 couldn't be upgraded due to the PS2 but I just feel this is a lame excuse, the game was pretty poorly optimised for PC also and still is.

They just make up random excuses, like this one. :S
Quote:
If we were to recreate final Fantasy VII with the same level of graphical detail as you see in Final Fantasy XIII, we'd imagine that that would take as much as three or four times longer than the three and a half years it has taken to put this Final Fantasy together!


Doesn't give me a great deal of faith in them as a developer (granted different team).

____________________________

#21 Feb 21 2010 at 10:27 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
295 posts
I think it's more the level of detail they would want to put into it. They generally seem to be perfectionists for the most part.

When they say recreating ff vii, they are probably thinking with the same art design.

Also, most games are shying away from the world map. Generally, the game is either split into sections that all fit together or the game is one large map.

if they were to redo vii with modern graphics, It would be more like dragon quest IX I think.

If they are refering to it as a copy paste job with updated graphics but still have the overworld run around, then yes, they are probably just being lazy :P

when I say that a DX11 PC won't help much, I mean that if you have a PC built to play DX 10.x at the highest settings, then a DX 11 card won't play the game any better than the card made for DX10.


But you are right, I hope that they will support dx 11 eventually. Games have finally phased out DX8, and are starting to phase out DX9 to some extent, as it is now generally the lowest supported end of DX level on newer games.

I still think that it will be at least a year for DX 11 to become the standard.

I think that SE will want to use the technology to it's fullest if and when they implement it, and not simply stick it in there. Out of everything, SE generally does things well rather than just doing them.


Edited, Feb 21st 2010 11:29pm by MetalSmith

Edited, Feb 21st 2010 11:34pm by MetalSmith
#22 Feb 22 2010 at 8:14 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,148 posts
I'd like DX10/11 out of the box. The shadow effects they can produce are superb. However if enabling DX10 shadows results in the same slide show Age of Conan does I'll pass.
____________________________
Mishana: DRG | THF | RDM | NIN
#23 Feb 22 2010 at 8:42 AM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Zemzelette wrote:
To put it visually.

I'd love to see it right out of the box. But I'll admit, my knowledge of programming is abysmal. I have no idea how difficult a dx9 to dx10/dx11 conversion would be, but something about this topic makes my programmer friends cringe. So I suppose I'll settle for a 'somewhere down the line'.


Edited, Feb 21st 2010 3:33pm by Zemzelette


That set of pictures are kind of misleading, because with Parallax occlusion mapping, there's nothing that DX9/10 can't do what DX11 is seen doing there.

Case in point, here is a shot of Crysis using DX9c.

The absolute biggest thing that DX11 can do is their new Tessellation methods that emulate displacement maps, to a very accurate degree.

To be fair, DX11 can use these bells and whistles without as much as a performance drop as DX9/10.

Edited, Feb 22nd 2010 8:49am by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#24 Feb 22 2010 at 11:18 AM Rating: Excellent
**
736 posts
Well, I know for sure it's in the ballpark of dx10, because that's an old comparison picture for dx9/10. :p

It's bad picture for other reasons. Mostly because it's marketing, and anything marketing is to some degree bullshot (although I cant quite put my finger on it). Ultimately, Diakar's 9, 10, and 11 comparison is much better.

Even if the major benefit of dx11 is one only one thing, displacement maps (or the close approximation thereof) is definitely something to be happy about. :)



Edited, Feb 22nd 2010 12:19pm by Zemzelette
#25 Feb 22 2010 at 12:08 PM Rating: Good
nVidia's announcement for today is that they're going to be...making an announcement at PAX 2010. Smiley: laugh I expect that announcement to be that production of their new GPUs will start late Q2 or sometime in Q3, meaning AMD's stranglehold on top GPU performance will remain unchecked for a good while yet. Also, I learned today while poking around that AMD's 5970 is backordered with 3+ month waits from order placement -> delivery. I don't really expect AMD to start any kind of preemptive price cutting just to kick nVidia in the teeth while nVidia tries to resume a competitive stance in the market which is both good and bad. Good in the sense that if you're in the market for a new GPU, you don't have to worry about seeing an ad somewhere a month from now featuring your hardware for half the price you paid for it, but bad in the sense that you can't just wait a month to get the hardware for half of what you'd pay to get it today ;D

As it pertains to FFXIV, as long as nVidia can get some good production runs in before the end of Q3, prices on current generation cards are going to start coming down substantially by the time FFXIV goes live. It would seem that AMD is way ahead of nVidia in the R&D department these days and the 6000 series GPUs aren't expected to go into production until late 2011 at the earliest. Anyone building a PC between now and 2012 would be remiss to not look very seriously at a motherboard with Crossfire/SLI support and even a lower end 5000 series GPU.
#26 Feb 22 2010 at 6:08 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Zemzelette wrote:
Well, I know for sure it's in the ballpark of dx10, because that's an old comparison picture for dx9/10. :p

It's bad picture for other reasons. Mostly because it's marketing, and anything marketing is to some degree bullshot (although I cant quite put my finger on it). Ultimately, Diakar's 9, 10, and 11 comparison is much better.

Even if the major benefit of dx11 is one only one thing, displacement maps (or the close approximation thereof) is definitely something to be happy about. :)



Oh bah, I could have sworn you'd linked a DX10/11 comparison shot. So tired. :(

But yeah, DX11 is great, but something I really don't blame SE for including right off the bat. Attempting to make something look appealing (Or functional! Like texture-tessellated stairs) to DX9/10/11 people all at the same time would be pretty difficult (and more importantly, time-consuming) to do. Here's to hoping for expansions in the future that support it.

Edited, Feb 22nd 2010 4:23pm by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#27 Feb 22 2010 at 6:45 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
184 posts
Quote:
Thanks for the link. A lot of the article was beyond me from a technical standpoint but it was enough to determine that whatever nVidia is announcing tomorrow, it isn't likely to impact the price of AMD GPUs in any substantial way. The downside, of course, is that until nVidia shows up on the market with viable DX11 GPUs, the lack of competition will keep AMD cards out of the hands of those who prefer to let price wars between nVidia and AMD save them a few bucks on the upgrade.


found some more info on the gtx480 (fermi). I saw xfx had a preorder for the card priced at us $679.... and it performs on par with the radeon 5870 which goes for about $409 or so... not looking so hot for nvidia :( I was holding off on buying a new card till I saw what fermi had going for it it's looking more and more like i'll be going ATI.
Link here


____________________________
Vanidin Pickles on Excalibur
#28 Feb 22 2010 at 7:10 PM Rating: Decent
*
95 posts
I really don't mind either way but the latest version would be nice.
____________________________
Sin(SWTOR): 50 Jedi Sentinel

Krystalin(FFXI) :(retired) 85BRD/85BLM/85WAR/85BLU/85SAM/85DRG/85PLD/85RDM/85THF/85DRK/75BST/75PUP/75COR/75MNK/75NIN/75RNG

Vikzul(WoW):(retired) 80 rogue

Clytie(WoW):(retired) 80 pld
#29 Feb 22 2010 at 8:22 PM Rating: Good
saiyandon wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for the link. A lot of the article was beyond me from a technical standpoint but it was enough to determine that whatever nVidia is announcing tomorrow, it isn't likely to impact the price of AMD GPUs in any substantial way. The downside, of course, is that until nVidia shows up on the market with viable DX11 GPUs, the lack of competition will keep AMD cards out of the hands of those who prefer to let price wars between nVidia and AMD save them a few bucks on the upgrade.


found some more info on the gtx480 (fermi). I saw xfx had a preorder for the card priced at us $679.... and it performs on par with the radeon 5870 which goes for about $409 or so... not looking so hot for nvidia :( I was holding off on buying a new card till I saw what fermi had going for it it's looking more and more like i'll be going ATI.
Link here


I'm normally not averse to corporate lulz stemming from dishonesty and scandal, but the whole nVidia fiasco is only going to hurt the consumer. It's going to hurt game studios as well.

5870 it is. Bastids.
#30 Feb 22 2010 at 10:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
295 posts
>_>

Thought it was only 300.

anyhow, 5770's are not very far behind in performance from the 5870's, and you can Xfire them and run it faster for $170 each.

#31 Feb 22 2010 at 10:58 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
nVidia overprices their high end cards because OpenGL tends to run a little better on 3D rendering applications, through archaic tradition.

They've been ******** professional CGI artists for years.
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#32 Feb 22 2010 at 11:22 PM Rating: Good
MetalSmith wrote:
>_>

Thought it was only 300.

anyhow, 5770's are not very far behind in performance from the 5870's, and you can Xfire them and run it faster for $170 each.



The XFX Radeon 5870 I'm looking at retails for $470 Canadian right now...about $400 USD. The only card on the market outperforming the 5870 is the 5970 which retails for around $800 CDN and is basically comparable performance to 2 x 5870 on one card for $140 less, but they're hard to get these days.

$170-200 for a near top-of-the-line GPU is pretty reasonable under the circumstances. For most people, the GPU is one of the most significant expenses in the building of a new PC, so unless people are going for extreme budget builds, DX11 capability is not too unattainable.
#33 Feb 23 2010 at 3:28 PM Rating: Good
**
394 posts
Kirbster wrote:
nVidia overprices their high end cards because OpenGL tends to run a little better on 3D rendering applications, through archaic tradition.

They've been ******** professional CGI artists for years.


I agree with the last statement, but what does OpenGL have to do with hardware pricing? The Quadro series is overpriced because nVidia supplies specialized drivers which enable some extra features irrelevant to gamers; otherwise, its architecture is mostly the same as the GeForce series. In either case, the pricing really has nothing to do with OpenGL optimization, it's more just coincidence that OpenGL is the preferred standard for non-gaming graphics development.

In any case, DX9 versus 10.1/11 is mostly a pointless debate. We have to remember that FFXIV is being developed with Crystal Tools, which was created while DX9 was the standard. This automatically negates most of the benefits of DX10/11, because backwards compatibility with DX9 is very limiting. That's why a game that supports both 9 and 10 only sees minor improvements with 10; a game made exclusively for 10/11 can see much more dramatic improvements, especially in efficiency. We're not going to see many games like that though, because the current generation of consoles is still on par with DX9, and most people are not DX10/11-compliant (remember, you need Vista/7 for DX10/11).

Anyway, not sweating it, even if they announce DX10/11 support for FFXIV, it will only make a small difference to those of us with the beefiest of graphics cards.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2010 4:33pm by TraumaFox
#34 Feb 24 2010 at 6:51 AM Rating: Decent
*****
12,622 posts
Right now I have a GeForce 285GTX but by the time this game comes out I'll probably have FERMI. I think having DX11 support would be really awesome, actually.
____________________________
Blah
#35 Feb 24 2010 at 10:24 AM Rating: Decent
Plays better than you
*****
11,852 posts

DX10 is a lot better than DX9. I haven't seen any comparisons w/ DX10 v 11, but suffice to say there is likely to be a huge difference between 9 and 11.

Having said that, I DONT CARE if FFXIV has DX9 or DX11. I have NEVER played a game where the graphics made the game great. I have played many games with beautiful graphics that were fun for about as long as the graphics were fun to look at. It would be nice, of course, if FFXIV supports DX10+, but for me it would not be a selling point in the least.

On the other hand, every graphics card currently being produced supports DX10. DX11 is supported by most of the new chipsets. If I were shopping for a graphics card now, I would make sure that whatever I bought supports DX11. (Personally, I bought a GTX260 for a LOT of money when it was relatively new, and three weeks later DX11 was confirmed for shipment with Win7 ... I was NOT happy!)
____________________________
Trubbles Stormborn - 25 ARC / 22 CNJ ... 18 FSH / 14 CUL

#36 Feb 24 2010 at 4:24 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Personally, I'm biased because my primary gaming desktop is still XP and I don't plan to upgrade to Vista or 7 in the near future, so if the game -required- DX10 or higher, I'm be pretty miffed.

OTOH, it would be nice, if possible, if the game had the ability to utilize DX10/11 -or- DX9 and provide graphics appropriately. Someone who has spent 2-3 grand to build a top of the line gaming PC should be able to get the most out of their system. I'll be upgrading my hardware soon, but I'm still not ready to step up to Vista or Win7 yet, since I still play a lot of older games (some of which are glitchy on XP at best) and question their compatibility with a newer OS, and I don't want to have two gaming PCs... although I might be forced into that at some point in the next 2-3 years anyway, so who knows.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#37 Feb 24 2010 at 4:38 PM Rating: Good
Mikhalia wrote:
Personally, I'm biased because my primary gaming desktop is still XP and I don't plan to upgrade to Vista or 7 in the near future, so if the game -required- DX10 or higher, I'm be pretty miffed.

OTOH, it would be nice, if possible, if the game had the ability to utilize DX10/11 -or- DX9 and provide graphics appropriately. Someone who has spent 2-3 grand to build a top of the line gaming PC should be able to get the most out of their system. I'll be upgrading my hardware soon, but I'm still not ready to step up to Vista or Win7 yet, since I still play a lot of older games (some of which are glitchy on XP at best) and question their compatibility with a newer OS, and I don't want to have two gaming PCs... although I might be forced into that at some point in the next 2-3 years anyway, so who knows.


You should be able to run most if not all of your older stuff in compatibility mode under Windows 7. Worst case scenario, you could keep the HD out of your old machine and use it in your new machine as a secondary boot drive with XP and your old games. Obviously it would be a bit of a nuisance to have to reboot if you were swapping between this game and that in the course of a session, but it's an option. I just double checked and you can still get drivers for Radeon 5000 series cards for XP Home/Pro, so you could be DX11 ready and still use your more current hardware to run your older games.
#38 Feb 24 2010 at 4:48 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
AureliusSir the Irrelevant wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
Personally, I'm biased because my primary gaming desktop is still XP and I don't plan to upgrade to Vista or 7 in the near future, so if the game -required- DX10 or higher, I'm be pretty miffed.

OTOH, it would be nice, if possible, if the game had the ability to utilize DX10/11 -or- DX9 and provide graphics appropriately. Someone who has spent 2-3 grand to build a top of the line gaming PC should be able to get the most out of their system. I'll be upgrading my hardware soon, but I'm still not ready to step up to Vista or Win7 yet, since I still play a lot of older games (some of which are glitchy on XP at best) and question their compatibility with a newer OS, and I don't want to have two gaming PCs... although I might be forced into that at some point in the next 2-3 years anyway, so who knows.


You should be able to run most if not all of your older stuff in compatibility mode under Windows 7. Worst case scenario, you could keep the HD out of your old machine and use it in your new machine as a secondary boot drive with XP and your old games. Obviously it would be a bit of a nuisance to have to reboot if you were swapping between this game and that in the course of a session, but it's an option. I just double checked and you can still get drivers for Radeon 5000 series cards for XP Home/Pro, so you could be DX11 ready and still use your more current hardware to run your older games.


When I say old stuff, I mean DOS and Windows 95-98 era games. Microprose's Magic: The Gathering's deck builder doesn't work in XP, Shandalar will get glitchy every so often. Myst won't run half the time. 7th Guest gets a little screwy from time to time also.

And I've had a lot of problems since I upgraded my nvidia GeForce 6600 to a Radeon HD 3650; so much so that I'm debating going back to nVidia again. Although I'm looking to replace my outdated intel board and processor with an AMD Phenom Quad core, since part of the compatibility issue is apparently that VIA chipsets don't play nice with some of the Radeon HD 3600 and 3800 series, so hard to say. In the end, my motherboard/processor/video card replacement may just hose my older games entirely and I might have no choice but to upgrade my OS to go with it. Won't know till the feds gimme my 1500 bucks.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#39 Feb 24 2010 at 6:54 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Quote:
Microprose's Magic: The Gathering's deck builder



Use OCTGN 2.0
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#40 Feb 24 2010 at 11:57 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
184 posts
Quote:

When I say old stuff, I mean DOS and Windows 95-98 era games. Microprose's Magic: The Gathering's deck builder doesn't work in XP, Shandalar will get glitchy every so often. Myst won't run half the time. 7th Guest gets a little screwy from time to time also.

And I've had a lot of problems since I upgraded my nvidia GeForce 6600 to a Radeon HD 3650; so much so that I'm debating going back to nVidia again. Although I'm looking to replace my outdated intel board and processor with an AMD Phenom Quad core, since part of the compatibility issue is apparently that VIA chipsets don't play nice with some of the Radeon HD 3600 and 3800 series, so hard to say. In the end, my motherboard/processor/video card replacement may just hose my older games entirely and I might have no choice but to upgrade my OS to go with it. Won't know till the feds gimme my 1500 bucks.


Solution: build the new system with the latest hardware, put windows 7 on it.
Next: Hit up craigslist, at any time there's someone dumping old p4 systems (more than enough for your legacy stuff) for next to nothing. throw 98/xp on that old dinosaur if it didn't come with it and you have your compatibility (not to mention you can now play the old stuff while standing around lfp on the new stuff ;p)

edited because I can't spell tonight.

Edited, Feb 24th 2010 9:57pm by saiyandon
____________________________
Vanidin Pickles on Excalibur
#41 Feb 26 2010 at 2:00 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
saiyandon wrote:
Quote:

When I say old stuff, I mean DOS and Windows 95-98 era games. Microprose's Magic: The Gathering's deck builder doesn't work in XP, Shandalar will get glitchy every so often. Myst won't run half the time. 7th Guest gets a little screwy from time to time also.

And I've had a lot of problems since I upgraded my nvidia GeForce 6600 to a Radeon HD 3650; so much so that I'm debating going back to nVidia again. Although I'm looking to replace my outdated intel board and processor with an AMD Phenom Quad core, since part of the compatibility issue is apparently that VIA chipsets don't play nice with some of the Radeon HD 3600 and 3800 series, so hard to say. In the end, my motherboard/processor/video card replacement may just hose my older games entirely and I might have no choice but to upgrade my OS to go with it. Won't know till the feds gimme my 1500 bucks.


Solution: build the new system with the latest hardware, put windows 7 on it.
Next: Hit up craigslist, at any time there's someone dumping old p4 systems (more than enough for your legacy stuff) for next to nothing. throw 98/xp on that old dinosaur if it didn't come with it and you have your compatibility (not to mention you can now play the old stuff while standing around lfp on the new stuff ;p)

edited because I can't spell tonight.

Edited, Feb 24th 2010 9:57pm by saiyandon


Yeah, part of my tax refund is buying me an AM3 Quad Core Phenom II x4, Radeon 5770, Win7x64, and a motherboard and RAM to match. Fiancee is buying herself a case for me to throw my old parts in and give to her for free (aside from the case). I can install old sh*t on her computer now.

I still hope it supports DX9 though, since she intends to play FF14 and I don't want to have to upgrade HER parts and OS too, just for one game.

Edited, Feb 26th 2010 3:01pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#42 Feb 26 2010 at 3:16 PM Rating: Default
No one should worry about upgrading their PC yet. If you can play WoW you probably will be able to play FFXIV, even if you are running Windows XP Directx 9. You have to remember they are making this for PS3 too, which like a dated PC now.

That being said... doesn't mean Square-Enix won't add bells and whistles to the PC version. I already upgraded to a 5870 Directx 11 video card and I would love to see an option to turn on tessellated character models.

BTW: Just one 5870 will be over kill for this game. Might as will play with Eye infinity feature and run with 3 monitors ^^




____________________________
WoW Pkite Blood Elf 80 Retribution Paladin Active
FFXI Yakumo Tarutaru 75 Black Mage Retired
Aion Pkite Elyos 43 Gladiator Retired
#43 Feb 26 2010 at 4:25 PM Rating: Good
Pseudopsia wrote:
No one should worry about upgrading their PC yet. If you can play WoW you probably will be able to play FFXIV, even if you are running Windows XP Directx 9. You have to remember they are making this for PS3 too, which like a dated PC now.

That being said... doesn't mean Square-Enix won't add bells and whistles to the PC version. I already upgraded to a 5870 Directx 11 video card and I would love to see an option to turn on tessellated character models.

BTW: Just one 5870 will be over kill for this game. Might as will play with Eye infinity feature and run with 3 monitors ^^


I actually thought about that, considering I can get 2 decent 24" LCD monitors for the price of another 5870, but it's a question of desk space as well as a difference in bezel size between my current monitor and the addons D: As long as you get a Crossfire compatible motherboard, a 5870 will last easily 2-3 years and by the time upgrading starts to look like it will offer any substantial benefit, you'll be able to pick up another 5870 for a significantly lower price than what they're going for now.
#44 Feb 26 2010 at 4:57 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Quote:
If you can play WoW you probably will be able to play FFXIV


I wouldn't say that so readily, considering the ****-poor poly density and painted textures of WoW models. Maybe if you're able to play WoW on high with everything at max.
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#45 Feb 26 2010 at 5:22 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
801 posts
Just noticed something when I was wandering around Wally World today...Bioshock2 for the PC runs on DX9c and XP.

So, I'm thinking just about any 2GHz+ true dual-core or higher system with at least 2GB RAM and video/sound with DX9c support in hardware should be able to run it fine (I get decent Last Remnant bench scores on my 3GHz C2D XP box with an HD4850).

Granted, you will get more bang for the buck with better hardware, and it would be nice if they offered the option of a DX10 or 11 mode, but considering how far back they started development on FF14--my guess is it's native to DX9 and anything higher would have been added as an afterthought (and may not be implemented as well as it could have been).

Raist
#46 Feb 26 2010 at 5:44 PM Rating: Good
Considering I still play FFXI it will be a huge jump for me regardless so I will be happy either way.
____________________________
PS: Your Wonder Clomps and Fang Necklace at DRG75 are utter dogsh*t terrible. You've had an entire month and made no improvements in your gear.

Bsphil to Phantasydragon
#47 Feb 27 2010 at 11:07 AM Rating: Good
**
257 posts
I don't mind that it doesn't have DX10/11 support. I just hope they actually support crossfire/SLI setups since I find my crossfire'd 4850s barely being utilized by most games and I will probably just stick with single cards from now on.

Also, I'm sure their will be plenty of mods out there for FFXIV that make it look much better than it is when it releases. We had all that DAT editing in FFXI and model enhancements along with having whole zone draw distance. A game could look much better with a dedicated community.

There was this crysis mod that made the game look so much better.

www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=382692#p382692

Edited, Feb 27th 2010 12:08pm by EpedemicOptikz
____________________________
FFXI(retired 04/2006): Epedemicoptikz, Phoenix Server, 75 SAM/NIN/WAR

This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 14 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (14)