| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Maya Rkell
    |
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:17:00 -
[121]
XP? I use 2k. You're making biased assumptions based on your own narrow worldview. Grow up and look outside your little box.
I suggest you actually take a look at what Vista will mean for you...so much you cannot DO on it. DX10 for Vista only is Microsoft's way to try and force people to upgrade.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Moominer
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:25:00 -
[122]
 Originally by: Maya Rkell
Indicentally, the average game programer DOSN'T have a doctorate in whatever...and he's going to take even longer to get to grips with DX10 than it took him to learn DX9c...you should hear them freaking over multi-core too.
Deary me, sigh. Considering your comment about multi-core I take it that you actually have read game-developer related discussion, from say the Game Algorithms list or the like? If so, I assume you have read more than one post, like where theres quite a lot of references to research papers about this, and that?
The people "with doctorates in whatever" write research papers, or articles in game industry publications. In those papers/articles they explain what they have done, how they did it, and what the results, pros and cons of doing it their way are.
The comes along the "average game programmer" - who, whilst might be pretty competent when it comes to programming, arn't really that amazing when it comes to coming up with really obscure ways in using vertex and pixel shaders. They reads these papers, works out how the authors did what they did, and go ahead and implement the solution.
You might actually learn something from this, by like, actually reading and comprehending the context in which I made the statement you quoted. Or instead you can continue to completely ignore anything bar "DX10, Vista" and spam the same old responses to posts not even directed at you 
Eve Fitting Manager
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:33:00 -
[123]
Assumption after assumption after assumption there.
I've read...considerably more than theoretical works about game design. In practice, it's never that near, and the vast majority of game engines out there don't even support shaders at this point in time, Eve being just another example of them.
(here's a hint btw - you don't need to be a coder in the traditional sense to work with shaders)
Furthermore, this is completely irellevant to the actual discussion here - the point about requiring Vista being a Bad Thing (TM).
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Moominer
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:35:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
I've read...considerably more than theoretical works about game design. In practice, it's never that near, and the vast majority of game engines out there don't even support shaders at this point in time, Eve being just another example of them.
(here's a hint btw - you don't need to be a coder in the traditional sense to work with shaders)
You do actually know what shaders are? Right?
Eve Fitting Manager
|
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:46:00 -
[125]
Please read the new Dev Blog and turn all discussion to the new thread.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online |
|
D'onryu Shoqui
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:47:00 -
[126]
i wouldnt even bother arguing guys ,this person isnt willing to change there opinion.
did you just spend hundreds of $ on a new pc without bothering to research what is happening with pc hardware? im beggining to think you just bought some 7800gt sli rig and your crying because you made a mistake and one that is going to stop you from seeing eves new graphics engine in all its glory.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 22:51:00 -
[127]
"http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/presentations/"
I've read that dx10 introduction a while ago, but it doesn't really answer my question ^^
What i mean is, i seriously doubt anyone is currently able to think of any kind of actual visual effect that would be made available by dx10, and which would make some tremendous difference in what the game looks like... that could justify the whole "new shaders will make what we have now look old overnight" line of comments. This is more wishful thinking and delusions of grandeur, that cover lack of actual solid ideas what else can be added to game visuals that is not possible and being done already.
The only thing at the moment seem to be generation on the fly of extra geometry to improve appearance of normal-mapped 'bumpy' surfaces. But even this people do already, with self-shadows and all.
(i realize the new architecture can make it easier for the programmers to achieve these effects. but the end user couldn't care less about this particular aspect, as long as things wind up for them looking no different)
"So why use DX10 now, and not DX9c? this is how i see it:
1. What's better in the short term and for the current eve playerbase -> programmable pipeline upgrade to trinity using DX9
2. What's better for the long term future of eve's graphics, the trinity engine (beyond eve?), and your employees skillsets -> DX10"
Except there's a part missing from that picture. Which is: "the hardware meeting requirement of 'long term future' engine won't really become widespread until well in the future as well."
So there is no real need to make this sort of choice between "well-being of EVE now" and "well being of EVE few years down the road". Instead, it appears more logical to target current hardware now, and then start development of next generation of engine for the hardware which, by the time work is done, actually may be something people have and use.
Does it mean twice the work that has to be done? Yes, of course. But trying to skip this work and going for shortcuts, thus effectively ignoring the needs of current playerbase and launching 'next generation' system before it's actually needed... isn't really benefitting EVE any, imo.
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |