Will lfs support DirectX10 
?
?Dtx 10
Maybe, maybe not. The current engine uses DX8. Maybe when Scawen decides to candy-up the graphics, he might switch to DX10, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
As soon as you can use DirectX10 with XP and without having to recode the graphics engine... yes!
(read: never)
What would you want to do with DX10 anyway? I mean LFS is not even using the possibilities of DX8 yet, and I don't think Scawen will magically get hot for bling bling effects in the next few years.
(read: never)
What would you want to do with DX10 anyway? I mean LFS is not even using the possibilities of DX8 yet, and I don't think Scawen will magically get hot for bling bling effects in the next few years.
yay! i must upgrade to an OS i haven't tested, and by a brand new graphics card! Yay!
Don't know, nobody does.
Why? Do you want LFS to support DX10? If so, why?
All the new graphical gizmos. Photorealistic graphics, you know?
You know, just "using" DX10 alone doesn't make your graphics look better. You still have to do lots of graphics oriented coding to actually achieve the levels you see in the promo shots. DX10 just provides the possibility, it's no magical box of instant graphics realism.
Again, we're not even using DX8 fully now, what makes you think Scawen will suddenly not code functionality, but eye candy instead?
Again, we're not even using DX8 fully now, what makes you think Scawen will suddenly not code functionality, but eye candy instead?
In 2-3 years Dtx 8,9 will die..
Hmm, yeah. But everytime I see this question asked, I wonder if the TS could actually explain the exact benefits of DX10. I mean, eg point me to something that is possible in DX10 but not in DX 7, 8 or 9.
To me it always comes across as "this is the newest one, we should have it. Why? Because it's new so it surely has to be better".
I would like some graphical updates, but I don't have any reason to think DX10 is necessary.
No it won't. Do you know how long it has taken for DX9 to get common?
Besides, even if DX10 takes of very fast, will DX 8/9 games suddenly stop working?
I'd imagine a switch to DX9 is likely to happen for S3. DX10 would just alienate too many users, LFS is the sim of choice for those with PCs as old as your dog.
DX10 is only available with Microsoft's vista OS 
considering that the current engine will be outdated and probably up for a major recode by the time s3 is released i really hope scawen switches to ogl
just so you know, to run a DX10 game in DX10 mode you WILL need Vista and a DX10 card, like the 8800 (well, all the 8xxxx cards do it, but they aren't out yet), or the R600 from ATi
You happen to have one?
You happen to have one?
No, in 2 years time everyone will be using DX8 or 9 as they realise how useless vista is.
-1 for DX10. Keep at at DX8. LFS is not a screenshot generator!
wouldn't mind the option of where you can change from dx8 to dx9 in the settings, ofcourse that would be for a final release
It is! Scawen implemented a screenshot button in the latest patch
OpenGL ftw
rudolf, just forget that damn DX10
rudolf, just forget that damn DX10
The fact of the matter is DX10 only works on the Vista DRM infection.
Here are the issues with that OS.
- The DRM is so over the top that ATI and NVidia can't actually debug their drivers to be able to get a release version out the door to run DX10 properly. Dell can't actually sell their games rigs with Vista installed yet!
- More and more companies are banning staff from installing the Vista and Office 2007 because it offers them nothing at high cost.
- Users are not jumping onboard Vista.
So given all this why would the devs move LFS to a system that would remove their user base and loose them money for no real gains.
The best move this sim could make right now is to openGL.
Since it's faster (see note below) and has just as much functionality as DX, I'v even seen HDR in opengl (hacked ofcourse).
unfortunately, anyone who actualy uses vista won't be able to play it if that happens because opengl has had its legs cut off in vista.
So now we are back to square one, DX8 or 9.
Aparently alot of game companies HATE DX10 anyway. since it doesn't offer them anything but more code to wright.
Note: On alot of older systems DX caused something I refer to as a memory blanket, not sure if thats the right way to put it though.
This "blanket" was basicaly the fact that DX acted as a layer between your software (game) and hardware, as far as I know this is still how it works. This layer was what alowed alot of windows based games to interact with your hardware and still be monitored by the OS.
On windows NT systems it alowed games to function properly since NT "didn't like" apps interacting with hardware directly and as far as I know that's why opengl didn't work on NT systems.
OpenGL may seem similar to DX but it infact is not, it doesn't have this extra layer, it alows games to use the functions on the hardware without running a check on them first. Where DX would run almost like a filter, GL runs as a direct link.
This information is about all I can remember from what my uncle explained to me about 5 years ago. He told me this when I asked him why my games ran faster in GL than DX.
Since it's faster (see note below) and has just as much functionality as DX, I'v even seen HDR in opengl (hacked ofcourse).
unfortunately, anyone who actualy uses vista won't be able to play it if that happens because opengl has had its legs cut off in vista.
So now we are back to square one, DX8 or 9.
Aparently alot of game companies HATE DX10 anyway. since it doesn't offer them anything but more code to wright.
Note: On alot of older systems DX caused something I refer to as a memory blanket, not sure if thats the right way to put it though.
This "blanket" was basicaly the fact that DX acted as a layer between your software (game) and hardware, as far as I know this is still how it works. This layer was what alowed alot of windows based games to interact with your hardware and still be monitored by the OS.
On windows NT systems it alowed games to function properly since NT "didn't like" apps interacting with hardware directly and as far as I know that's why opengl didn't work on NT systems.
OpenGL may seem similar to DX but it infact is not, it doesn't have this extra layer, it alows games to use the functions on the hardware without running a check on them first. Where DX would run almost like a filter, GL runs as a direct link.
This information is about all I can remember from what my uncle explained to me about 5 years ago. He told me this when I asked him why my games ran faster in GL than DX.
ive heard that Nvidia have told Vista where to go ( in the Rubbish Bin 
)
)not to mention that its the first step towards linux compatibility
well basically all graphics card manufacturer will have to do i write ogl drivers from the ground up which they are curently doing
considering that all professional apps run on ogl and they sell the cards to make them run fast its not like they have a choice other than to write their own ogl driver and api support
It is a bit Off Topic, but please give me a support of Ageia Physic card and i will be happy
I'll tell Bill Gates where to shove his DX10 and DRM.
We haven't seen anybody use the full feature set of DX9 yet anyway, so I don't understand why people are wetting their pants over DX10. It seems to be a case of "one louder" syndrome.
I think I'm going to build an XP-based gaming box this year but switch to Mac for work. Fifteen years of Windows is enough for anyone.
I think I'm going to build an XP-based gaming box this year but switch to Mac for work. Fifteen years of Windows is enough for anyone.
What that card that nobody support with a tiny user base. Pointless.
This card was a non starter when released and they never got the game support needed to make it worth it.
1
2
Dtx 10
(33 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG