No DX11?

[flashbang151 0]

Damn! I'm really excited about the Arma 3 announcement but one thing is bothering me. Why DX10 and not DX11?

Maybe a Dev can clarify that? I saw what DX11 can do. Shogun Total War 2 runs 50% faster with the DX11 patch. No flickering and smooth shadows.

ARMA 3 wohoooo!!!

[PuFu 4600]

it says Requirements just above where you read about DX10. It doesn't say features, does it?

[metalcraze 290]

DX10 and DX11 don't bring any visual improvements over DX9.

They don't magically speed up games by 50% either.

They may as well just double the polygons on their models and you will have the same sweet performance hit as with "hw tessellation".

[hamm 10]

DX10 and DX11 don't bring any visual improvements over DX9.

They don't magically speed up games by 50% either.

They may as well just double the polygons on their models and you will have the same sweet performance hit as with "hw tessellation".

This post is wrong.

:j:

[neokika 62]

DX10 and DX11 don't bring any visual improvements over DX9.

Yeah right...

Anyway, seems DX10 is required, does not mention if DX11 is included or not, so, it may be included, just not required.

_neo_

[liquidpinky 11]

This post is wrong.

:j:

Very wrong in fact.

[Primarch 10]

DX10 and DX11 don't bring any visual improvements over DX9.

They don't magically speed up games by 50% either.

They may as well just double the polygons on their models and you will have the same sweet performance hit as with "hw tessellation".

Woohoo, doctor IdunnowtfIamtalkingabout is here!

[sickboy 13]

Requirement is DX10. Perhaps Recommended will be DX11? :)

[flashbang151 0]

Hope so. The features Multithreaded Rendering and Tessellation are made for Arma 3 *lol*.

[dale0404 5]

Yeah right...

Anyway, seems DX10 is required, does not mention if DX11 is included or not, so, it may be included, just not required.

_neo_

This.

[RadioActiveLobster 10]

Just for performance increases I'd like to see the engine have a DX11 renderer

[liquidpinky 11]

My biggest pet hate is having made gun models myself I find myself instantly counting the sections on a guns barrel and hating how they could have added some more polies to keep it looking more real, even with normal maps there is still a point where you can see the segments.

And don't even get me started on hexagonal vehicle wheels. sheesh.

DX11 would remove this for me if it was utilized, plus it would be another get it right up you to the ageing consoles. :P

BIS I urge you, help a pedantic man get some sleep at nights.

[5LEvEN 11]

Dx11 would be a nice option

[Cookieeater 10]

DX10 and DX11 don't bring any visual improvements over DX9.

They don't magically speed up games by 50% either.

They may as well just double the polygons on their models and you will have the same sweet performance hit as with "hw tessellation".

This post is right. What the hell has DX10 given us? What the hell has DX11 given us? Tessellation? Tessellation is barely noticeable, we've come to a point where polygon counts don't matter as much anymore, and having more polygons is redundant and unnoticeable, as the models themselves are detailed already. DX10 is there because it's easier to develop graphics on than DX9.

[Przemek_kondor 13]

I remember that one of the BIS employee (I think it was Dwarden) wrote that DX10 brings nothing new and DX11 own some new features that is why it looks weird.

Seems to be a big deal with NVidia -First PhysX and then DX10 - IFAIK geforces implement DX11 quite lately (comparing to radeons) (GF2xx serie doesn't have it yet)

[maddogx 13]

Minimal requirement is DX10, that doesn't mean DX11 isn't still in the cards.

Assuming for a moment that the game will support DX11, if they had put DX11 as a minimal requirement, even more peeps would be hitting the roof right now, because it would have forced them to upgrade to NVidia 400/500+ or AMD 5000/6000+ series cards.

[quicksand 0]

Well it's a good sign to see that the ArmA 3 engine has been updated to support DirectX 10 to begin with. From what I can tell a lot of the core things in the Real Virtual engine have been rewritten from the core. Things like underwater which I haven't seen for 10 years of BIS games, physics seem to point out to a new dawn.

I'm going to bu a direct x 11 powerful card for this game. And I sincerly hope that BIS can add support for tesselation, is honestly a stand out feature to be had in a game of this scope and size!!!

Example:

[Przemek_kondor 13]

Minimal requirement is DX10, that doesn't mean DX11 isn't still in the cards.

That's obvious. But I don't understand this assuming (that Arma3 uses DX11). Could a game use DX11 but don't require it?

Is there any fallback DX11 -> DX10 for DX11-only features?

[maddogx 13]

That's obvious. But I don't understand this assuming (that Arma3 uses DX11). Could a game use DX11 but don't require it?

Is there any fallback DX11 -> DX10 for DX11-only features?

Some other games support DX9 with optional DX11 where available. Why shouldn't Arma3 support DX10 and optional DX11?

EDIT: Civ V apparently supports both DX10 and DX11. It was also the first game to fully implement DX11 multithreaded rendering, AFAIK. So it must be possible.

[EricM 0]

HW tesselation IS a big deal and a game changer for a game like arma, especially for the environment : With a fixed grid cell of a few meters, anything smaller is impossible to reproduce (no small road ditches, uneven ground, ocean waves etc...). With HW tesselation, it opens up a world of details at a fraction of the cost : some of it can be procedurally generated (waves, perlin noise for micro terrain detail), some can be simple displacement textures...

At last, since the tesselation is progressive as you move towards the object, it also really helps on the LOD swapping issues.

DX10 was useless for the most part, but DX11 does bring optimizations and new features. By summer 2012, it'll be a given for any new AAA PC games, especially after the release of Battlefield 3.

Edited May 20, 2011 by EricM

[Pyronick 21]

DirectX 10 is actually very useful as Direct3D 9 (and other DX API) calls are emulated and bring alot of extra overhead processing. The fact that people don't notice any progression from Direct3D 9 to Direct3D 10 is because developers don't use the new featureset, they just make the game with a DX9 mindset when much more is possible.

The newer geometry instancing API alone should improve performance drastically. The improved occlusion culling could improve on the performance aswell.

Then we obviously have the newer Direct3D 11 features such as tessellation and the natively multithreaded renderer. The latter one could be written natively in the engine, but that still shouldn't be as efficient as directly in the OS-layer.

I still doubt programmers and graphical artists are capable or willing to use it efficiently though.

[msy 22]

I think DX10 only means if you even have X1950 XTX CF or WINDOWS XP, you can't play ARMA3 either.

[dmarkwick 261]

At last, since the tesselation is progressive as you move towards the object, it also really helps on the LOD swapping issues.

I don't know too much about tesselation & its abilities: would tesselation remove the need for LODs completely? Given that all models have LODs, including the highest resolution LOD, then maybe a model with ONLY the highest resolution LOD but with a suitable tesselation setting would solve a lot of problems?

[nodunit 397]

middle to end. If memory serves, the tesselation takes a high poly model but subtracts more and more the farther you are away, but as you get closer it adds more to keep the model looking as sharp as possible, it's sort of like the system doing the LOD control fluidly rather than jumping from mesh to mesh.

better wireframe example

and some others

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1117/1/

Edited May 20, 2011 by NodUnit

[PuFu 4600]

middle to end. If memory serves, the tesselation takes a high poly model but subtracts more and more the farther you are away, but as you get closer it adds more to keep the model looking as sharp as possible.

we all know that. But would it mean that a native DX11 game could have it meshes in only one LOD (call it LOD 1.0), without the need of secondary visual ones?

I don't know too much about tesselation & its abilities: would tesselation remove the need for LODs completely? Given that all models have LODs, including the highest resolution LOD, then maybe a model with ONLY the highest resolution LOD but with a suitable tesselation setting would solve a lot of problems?

i have been asking myself the same thing since DX11 tessellation was announced, but i wasn't able to find an answer to it. We are talking here about DX11 native games only, not a mix of DX10 and 11 though