Print

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(nickthegreat @ Sep 8 2006, 07:23 AM)

I guess this is what Im getting at - did MS leave out certain DX10 features because they knew, despite the increased difficulty of programming straight to the GPU, that better results would be gained by bypassing the API? Or was it actually because not all DX10 features (right word?) were finalised @ the 360s release? If the latter is correct, why haven't they updated the console yet?

The features were left out because they weren't finished yet, and they still aren't finished. AFAIK DX10 is supposed to launch with Windows Vista... which is why the Xbox 360 hasn't yet been updated... because there still isn't anything to update it with. the DX10 SDK just came out last month, but Windows and Xbox users wont be able to run DX10 games until the release the runtime environments.

Right from the Direct X website:

QUOTE

We are pleased to announce the availability of the August 2006 DirectX SDK. NOTE: This DirectX SDK contains Direct3D 10 components that are not usable until the Windows Vista RC1 release.

The Crysis developers are basically either coding BEST GUESSES as to how DX10 will work or they've somehow got early SDK builds... or I suppose it's possible they're talking out of their asses on just about everything  

QUOTE(nickthegreat @ Sep 8 2006, 07:23 AM)

- in anycase, am I not right in assuming that this just makes it more difficult to achieve a DX10 graphical quality (eg crysis) rather than making it 'impossible'/the system 'underpowered' as Crytek are stating? (otherwise if this logic is adhered to  then you could claim the PS3 is 'underpowered' due to the 360's XNA - which is obviously a completely false statement.)

Some of the special graphical effects can be unbelievably difficult to program directly coding for the GPU. In the past we didn't see very many effects because the hardware just couldn't handle it. Coding directly for the GPU it might take weeks and months to implements some kind of lighting effect. Where using direct X it can often be as simple as flipping a bit to enable it.

I believe this is what they were getting at when they said that it would be impossible to do without direct X.... NOTHING is impossible, but somethings are just so difficult to do that it might as well be impossible.

[gsharpshooter]

QUOTE(iforbes @ Sep 6 2006, 04:16 PM)

Ain't nothing going to stop the PS3 from being a huge success.

The problems with blue ray will make it stall from the gate, but it still will win the race.

People want to bitch about how expensive it is, but compared to the other offerings and what you're getting for your money, it's a bargain.

An Xbox 360/hard drive can be upgraded with a HD drive but that brings the price up to $600. With that same cash, you can purchase a PS3 and get not just Hi-Def video but also with HDMI, additional 40 gigs of storage and near 100% compatibiltiy with PS2 and PS1 games which most people still have a nice collection of.

Microsoft is the biggest pirate with the most expensive 'complete' system.
Choices are;
1.If you're a cheap SOB who likes cutting edge gaming experiences, buy a WII
2 If you want the overall best multimedia experience, save and wait, then get a PS3
3 If you want to game now in mid range PC def graphics without buying a more expensive capable PC, and don't mind getting ram rodded by Microsoft for accesories, then get a 360

LMAO buddy rightn ow im reading news that basically micrsoft just ahs to beat the nintendo wii WHICH DEFF SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM  and what im looking at so far why buy ps3 if almost every game comeso ut on 360 also and less the money to pay 360 $400 for the best package Ps3 500-600 $$ and guess what u have to buy hd cables sepratly xtra forty bucks with the console no thanx already got theb est deal around think smart buy 360  

[gsharpshooter]

EDit sorry for double posting and oo yeah still sure u wanan buy ps3 lets say the console and everything to u is cheap well lets see hmm ever thought blu ray is new and allows alot more space more space = more gamez to be long well guess what ur not gonan only prob pay 645$ yes 645$ cuz its high def cable sold sepratly RIp off already like i said. My point is gamez are gonna cost 60-100 dollars for one game YES ONE GAME like i said more memory and longer games = more of ur money for sony so say u buy ps3 and a game that maybe went to 100 oo lets see the price now not so low anymore is it now    yes i am a xbox 360 fan and ms fan i think ps3 and all consoles are gr8 but not when its like this i wish i could create conoles like today so u guyz could buy them way cheaper from me cuz im not like u guys caring about money i dont care about money money is there just to drown us all into its trap and is the evil side of human beings when there greedy so thats why i dont care about it but if u work for it thats a diff story thanx for ur time to everyone.

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Sep 8 2006, 09:17 AM)

My results from the fanboy quiz...

Nintendo Fanboy: 3%
Sony Fanboy: 6%
Microsoft Fanboy: 83%

Fug yeah

 

Good stuff!

QUOTE(silentbob343 @ Sep 8 2006, 12:15 PM)

Angel

I'm still lost.

[asspants]

"Reporter discovers latest crazes: "Blogging" and "The Charleston". Tune in at 11!!" - Ric Romero

[vengeancegoon]

QUOTE(Foe-hammer @ Sep 9 2006, 06:40 AM)

Good stuff!
I'm still lost.

Angel, as in Buffy spinoff. Wolfram and Heart were the evil lawyer company (in our world, but they existed in others) that was trying to bring about the apocalypse. EA & Sony are Wolfram and Heart is the nerdrage I was getting at