DX 12

[darmaster]

just wanted to post a video about dx 12, haven't found (nor looked) for a dx 12 thread, anyway remember hair being huge mom's spaghetti in video games?

go 2:45 for ejaculation

[Golem]

fuck graphics in video games

[Banok]

its like fancy but when we will actually want games that render every hair on a human head seperately? probably never since as gamer's we'd always rather just render more characters.

[IR_Kuoin]

its like fancy but when we will actually want games that render every hair on a human head seperately? probably never since as gamer's we'd always rather just render more characters.

One highly rendered main character among an ocean of low res NPCs.

[Tibe]

One highly rendered main character among an ocean of low res NPCs.

That really is how it generally plays out. Or one "default" face for NPCs that has been slightly modified for each of em, but they still all look completely similar. Like they are all siblings.

[darmaster]

yes usually there's not such a huge difference, it's not like the main character looks 2014 and the npcs look 2001, just look at recent games like witcher 3 or gta, surely main characters are better rendered but the rest is fine too at least for me. anyways, the thing that interests me the most is the optymization for GPU and CPU, as far as i got the main thing about the cpu is that finally they'll be able to use and distribute work on more cores (previously the most they could reach was 4 i think) and as for the gpu a main improvement in general; tests showed hardware being about 10x faster than dx 11, but of course they said it has to be taken with a pinch of salt; that said, they talk about a general 50% improvement from dx 11, which is good for my poor 290x and caca optymization because caca nvidia.

anybody here with more knowledge could share wtf is going to happen and what should we expect?

[Molly]

I believe when I see...

...not a moment before

[Panos_]

I`d take gameplay over fancy gfx`s every day of the week.

[darmaster]

Ye if I could have both I'd be happier :d ; we could have games with shitty engines amd amazing gameplay but noone would enjoy them in 2015, if witcher 3 had morrowind graphics I doubt it would be considered that good, so good graphics and decent engine is close to "necessary" in 2015 imo.

[Xant]

I`d take gameplay over fancy gfx`s every day of the week.

Why does this false dichotomy even exist?

I'd rather take gameplay AND fancy graphics.

[Tibe]

You can easily get both in Single player. Multi however has to really limit its resources. Especially the ones where you do more than just click to attack and press buttons to do abilities, with fuckton of players at the same place. Imagine Rust or Warband 200 players at same place battles in W3 graphics. Nobody could play that properly even in 2025.

Massive multiplayer games have breaks on them. However I dont really see how good graphics can ruin decent single player games. Unless it does that Order 1886 thing, where the developers went full retard and spent more time modeling the pipes in the bloody background and how the characters coats move, instead of making the gameplay. That game was no game, it was a god damn showcase for next gen graphics and nothing else.

[Xant]

Nobody could play that properly even in 2025.

Really? So you're saying that computers today wouldn't be able to run high-end 2005 SP games if they were multiplayer?

[Kafein]

You can easily get both in Single player. Multi however has to really limit its resources. Especially the ones where you do more than just click to attack and press buttons to do abilities, with fuckton of players at the same place. Imagine Rust or Warband 200 players at same place battles in W3 graphics. Nobody could play that properly even in 2025.

Massive multiplayer games have breaks on them. However I dont really see how good graphics can ruin decent single player games. Unless it does that Order 1886 thing, where the developers went full retard and spent more time modeling the pipes in the bloody background and how the characters coats move, instead of making the gameplay. That game was no game, it was a god damn showcase for next gen graphics and nothing else.

Graphics are only a problem for MP games because for a MP game to be really popular you need the option to play with a potato. Other than that, there's no link between graphics quality and the fact that something is multiplayer or not, all other things being equal (i.e. amount of characters on screen). If anything, MP games would logically be less CPU intensive than SP games because you don't need AI but that doesn't really show in practice because it depends entirely on which game we're talking about. In any case, your example about Warband 200 players with W3 graphics is exactly the kind of things that would be easily doable, considering both those things are feasible separately. Again, showing 200 characters in W3 does put some pressure that doesn't exist in W3 itself, but that's only because they didn't put 200 NPCs in the same place.

What you do get is that because of the network, MP games tend to have poor performance regardless of graphics. It's not because of CPU or GPU bottlenecks.

[cmp]

Imagine Rust or Warband 200 players at same place battles in W3 graphics. Nobody could play that properly even in 2025.

Actually, that's not true. What makes W3 graphics extremely heavy is lighting and post processing, both of which are almost entirely independent from on-screen geometry (what matters is screen resolution). Adding hundreds of characters might be a little too much for current graphics cards, but it should be easily achievable in a generation or two.
That's just graphics though. There are bigger problems when making a game like that (network, CPU...).

[Tibe]

Heh. Fair enough.