TheBluePill
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 3,773
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Microsoft says Crysis will be Vista's Halo
- Thread starter TheBluePill
- Start date
WhyYouLoveMe
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 6,513
I think Vista's killer app will be Vista.
Lol...Jokingly Right?.....I Think Crysis Will Be A Killer App For Windows In General Cause As Far As I Know It Will Be Solely For Windows. Regardless Which Os...Xp And Vista (As Far As I Last Read) Will Both Run The Game....So Win Win... And You Dont Have To Solely Use DX10 Cards For Vista.....But Its An Excellent Upgrade Path...When Windows XP Is No Longer The "It" OS I'M Sure Vista Will Take Over Therefore Increasing Dx10 Cards Power..
...But My Point Is That It Shouldn't Be The "Big One" For Vista (Even Though It Will Be The 1st Game To Use DX10) Cause Im Sure Plenty Of People Using Xp Are Going To Buy The Game And Play It.
damonposey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,320
when the time comes, I wish there would be a dx10 video card/vista bundle, where you could save some $ on vista, because theres no point getting one without the other if you are preparing for games like crysis.
rfwinters77
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 996
"Crysis will be Vistas Halo"
God I hope not. Didn't care for Halo much.
God I hope not. Didn't care for Halo much.
JustinSane
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2005
- Messages
- 2,425
How dare they compare Halo with Crysis. How dare they!
WhyYouLoveMe
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 6,513
No joke at all. I'm not going to get Vista just because Crysis is released. THAT'S a joke. Is this what MS is going to tell all the fortune 500 companies? lol
I'm just saying that this article quoted in the OP is completely game/entertainment specific. It has nothing to do with new security features, networking capabilities, multimedia functions, integration, hardware support, stability, etc...
The article speaks of MS's previous consoles and their games, not the O/S releases and it's games. The whole comparison is off the wall to begin with.
Whoah there big guy, easy on the caps please? It's -really- hard to read stuff like that when every word starts off like a sentence.
MS needs a way to get people interested in Vista. Sure, it's got Aero... in the multihundred dollar package. So, what does Vista offer that XP doesn't?
There won't be DX10 for XP. Therefore, to play DX10 games, you need Vista. However, for a publisher to say, "we want developer Y to make this game w/ DX10 features at a cost of X dollars" then the user base has to be there to warrant the cost.
There's a lot of improvements in Vista over XP, the cosmetic changes are just the most obvious.
Funnily enough a nice amount of the changes seem to benefit gamers, despite the OS inherently needing more CPU cycles and more RAM games actually run reasonably well on it as well, with enough tweaking and improved drivers Im sure the performance gap can be brought down to be almost as good as XP's and that would be pretty damn good.
Funnily enough a nice amount of the changes seem to benefit gamers, despite the OS inherently needing more CPU cycles and more RAM games actually run reasonably well on it as well, with enough tweaking and improved drivers Im sure the performance gap can be brought down to be almost as good as XP's and that would be pretty damn good.
It's not about performance it's about graphical quality, Crysis will make at least some use of DX10 features (optional) and since DX10 will never be available for XP you will be required to be running Vista to be able to use those DX10 features.
It will no doubt amount to a few effects, if we were to lean anything about DX9 it's that back when that was released it was a while before any games were released which used DX9 components and that only a few percent (less than 5) of shaders required DX9 to work.
It wont be for a good few years we'll see games really use the features of DX10, by then things like Vista and DX10 compliant video cards will only be a problem for the people with the oldest PC's
It will no doubt amount to a few effects, if we were to lean anything about DX9 it's that back when that was released it was a while before any games were released which used DX9 components and that only a few percent (less than 5) of shaders required DX9 to work.
It wont be for a good few years we'll see games really use the features of DX10, by then things like Vista and DX10 compliant video cards will only be a problem for the people with the oldest PC's
Uhh nope...
Cevat has stated that the experience in Crysis will be the same when comparing DX10 and DX9. You wont be seeing different effects or features in the DX10 version of Crysis.
"In general, we utilize the new interface of D3D10 to get better performance."
Source: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/news.html?sid=6163791
"There are many more useful features we want to utilize as well, such as texture lookups in vertex and geometry shader, stream out, and integer math. D3D10 hardware is now required to do high-quality texture filtering, which can result in better shading quality (such as specular effects or reflections)."
I'd hate to see geometry shader effects running in software on XP......
Seriously, you can make DX9 look "as good" in Crysis as DX10, however the performance won't be near satisfactory. To actually run the game looking its best, you ARE going to need Vista.
I'd hate to see geometry shader effects running in software on XP......
Seriously, you can make DX9 look "as good" in Crysis as DX10, however the performance won't be near satisfactory. To actually run the game looking its best, you ARE going to need Vista.
The game may not look as good, but thats because DX10 hardware (i.e. G80) has better filtering. It isn't Vista or DX10 feature set that will provide a slight visual improvement when looking at Crysis.
Essentially the only difference when comparing the two APIs Crysis is using is performance. Therefore my original statement stands.
TekSomniaK
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,144
So true. Then again look how Far Cry caught everyone by surprise with no hype at all
Meh, Halo is successful because it is a) a good game and b) accessible. Crysis may be good (I have no doubt that it great a game) but it certainly isn't accessible. Vista + new graphics card = $$$. That's not to say it won't be very successful, I just don't see it approaching Halo levels.
I think Spore will be a much bigger deal.
I think Spore will be a much bigger deal.
damonposey
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,320
i was very hyped with farcry, but my hype died down when I realized that a lot of what you saw in the screenshots was not actually game space you could explore.
S
SpeedRunner
Guest
Holy crap this game is getting hyped. I am hoping for anything close to or better than Far Cry.
J-Mag, it seems we are agreeing and disagreeing at the same time lol. DX9 can look as good (E3 06 on dual X1900s), but up until the release of the Crysis G80 vids, it never ran at anything really approaching smooth. Peeps who play this game on the DX9 path will not be able to max it, and "as such" it won't look as nice.
What I am interested in too is that MS has claimed DX9.0l on Vista will also show benefits for DX9 class hardware, in comparison to 9.0c on XP. Whether or not this pans out will be something to watch out for.
What I am interested in too is that MS has claimed DX9.0l on Vista will also show benefits for DX9 class hardware, in comparison to 9.0c on XP. Whether or not this pans out will be something to watch out for.
So many haters about vista and DX10.
I find it funny when people are saying "omg look at their marketing strategy, they are only talking about a game as its 'KILLER APP' so therefore its going to flop for F500 companies". If you took half a second to google some more vista information you would see that they have many other statments out about different vista features. Guess what... if those features are not enough for you to warrent buying the software, than dont. It's your choice to buy it, you're not being forced.
Second, why would they make it DX10 capable if there was no advantage?
Seriously, ask yourself that question and give me an answer that doesnt sound stupid...
Yes it will be played in XP, and people will love it. No, it wont look as good. If you've never seen the MSFlight sim screen shots from DX9 --> DX10 do yourself a favor and look them up, there is a significant difference.
I find it funny when people are saying "omg look at their marketing strategy, they are only talking about a game as its 'KILLER APP' so therefore its going to flop for F500 companies". If you took half a second to google some more vista information you would see that they have many other statments out about different vista features. Guess what... if those features are not enough for you to warrent buying the software, than dont. It's your choice to buy it, you're not being forced.
Second, why would they make it DX10 capable if there was no advantage?
Seriously, ask yourself that question and give me an answer that doesnt sound stupid...
Yes it will be played in XP, and people will love it. No, it wont look as good. If you've never seen the MSFlight sim screen shots from DX9 --> DX10 do yourself a favor and look them up, there is a significant difference.
WhyYouLoveMe
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 6,513
LOL - Exactly my point, k. The OP said "it will be Vista's killer app." I say it's not. YOU say it's not. We agree on everything except for the part about me being stupid. In the post you're referring to I'm just trying to infer what the OP is thinking. (notice the "lol" after the F500 rhetorical question) I even go on to explain that the article quoted is game specific. The OP thinks that MS thinks that Crysis will be Vista's killer app. Not just killer game. I say that's insane. Apparently so do you. Can't we all just get along?
You can't really claim that it was DX9's fault for making the first few vids choppy. There are other factors which could cause this. A simple one can be just the conversion of the video. Also the game was in a pre-pre-alpha state.
Essentially we have no solid numbers on the performance difference between DX9 and DX10. However, I have seen performance detriments for vista when it comes to GPU drivers. Hopefully this will be resolved since we wont see Crysis for another 5-6months minimum.
Then we have the increased resource use of Vista, which again could put XP in a performance advantage.
You could play the DX9 path with an 8800... The benefit of the DX10 API has not been proven, so it could be only a 5% differential for all we know.
Can you show me a good link? You may have been looking at the edited promo shots.
When DX10 video cards cost so much, I don't think it will do so well. Maybe over the long run (like 5 years) but it will not sell that well at first. I am sure there will be cheaper versions of the cards in a few months but I will just assume that even the top of the line one will have a hard time getting good frame rates. That is the way all games have been recently.
That's_Corporate
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2006
- Messages
- 1,738
Amen to that. I couldn't stand Halo.
Got 1/2 way through the campaign and just dropped it. Could never figure out why people kept humping the 'Halo' leg.
TheBluePill
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 3,773
I am willing to bet that the performance differences between the DX9 and DX10 Version will be enough to fuel a surge in DX10 hardware and copies of Vista for those that don't have it. Sure there will be other titles, but this will push it, Just like Doom 1 Sold 486's, Quake Sold Pentiums and Doom 3 Sold 6800s. (note, those were all hardware peices). Now you have the added expense of buying the DX10 OS, even when XP is more or less, "enough" for the forseeable future, that DX10 is the "kicker" for every gamer.
I will bet that a lot of us will go ahead and buy either a DX10 level Card or Vista or Both before the launch of Crysis. I beleive Crysis, and possibly a few other titles will be enough to push the rest of us to buy the remaining peice (IE Vista or a DX10 Card) to be fully Vista/DX10 ready.
I will bet that a lot of us will go ahead and buy either a DX10 level Card or Vista or Both before the launch of Crysis. I beleive Crysis, and possibly a few other titles will be enough to push the rest of us to buy the remaining peice (IE Vista or a DX10 Card) to be fully Vista/DX10 ready.
Crysis is NOT a DX10 game exclusive. It will run in DX9. I suggest you read the in-depth gamespot Crysis interview:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/c...=topslot;title;4&om_act=convert&click=topslot
A part of particular interest, for those that don't want to go to the DX10 path yet:
Well except for the large bags of money Microsoft is handing out to have Crisis be the flagship vista title.
WhyYouLoveMe
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 6,513
lol - How/What are they handing out and to whom? Are you on their bag list?
Can I get on it? Where is this bag o money trail?That's_Corporate
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2006
- Messages
- 1,738
I wouldn't doubt if the benefit is more than just effects for DX10.
DX10 Crysis could very well mean vastly improved textures, greater draw distance, better shadows AND an overall increase in your FPS rate.
If DX10 is truly more efficient, then the aforementioned benefits are not impossible.
Well I mean all graphical effects, theres a lot more than can be squeezed out of DX9 I feel, we're still not running PC's that are good enough on average to run effects like motion blur and depth of field, this sort of stuff Valve and co are looking at putting into Ep2, DODS, Portal etc. (by average I mean what the average joe-schmoe is running, 6600GT sort of thing - we already know these effects run well on the latest and greatest)
Any additional performance benefits from the new API in vista is likely to be crushed by the additional overhead vista itself requires.
This is an interesting point. I've benchmarked with both XP and Win98. When i had a lower end computer, Win98 was much faster across the board. It wasn't 'til i upgraded considerably that XP's performance started overtaking Win98 once i passed the 'overhead'.
How much of an upgrade would it take for Vista to be worth it?