• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
iYossi

OpenGL
[discussion]DirectX 9 or 10 or 11?


33 posts in this topic

So I think I finally answered my self about OpenGL or DirectX, and as you see, I've chose DX. Now, I am facing a question just as big. 9, 10 or 11? I have the graphic card 8400GS and I know it is weak and won't work with DX11, but I am upgrading it, hopefully in a month.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DX11 has "features levels" that allows you to support any graphics card down to DX9 level ones ([i]GeForce6+?[/i]).
The only downside is that DX11 applications do not run on Windows XP.

On the other hand, DX9 does run on Windows XP.

There is no reason to use DX10.

In a nutshell, if you want to support XP, use DX9, otherwise use DX11.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait, so why not use DX10? Cuz untill I won't upgrade I still want to run more advanced stuff than a triangle.

And no, I rather use what's really best. Windows XP is too old anyway.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[font="Calibri"][size="3"]DirectX 11 supports older hardware (DX9; DX 10), too. Therefore you don’t need DirectX 10 anymore as you can do anything with DirectX 11. [/size]

[/font]
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Geri' timestamp='1311601637' post='4839981']
9
[/quote]

How 'bout an explenation?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignore Dx10. On Dx11 You have something called "feature levels" that let you run on Dx10 and Dx9 hardware (the Dx9 level is a bit more limitied compared to original Dx9). If you want to write a 2D game or a relatively simple 3D game, I would go for Dx9. Otherwise Dx11.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Guns' timestamp='1311602856' post='4839989']
Ignore Dx10. On Dx11 You have something called "feature levels" that let you run on Dx10 and Dx9 hardware (the Dx9 level is a bit more limitied compared to original Dx9). If you want to write a 2D game or a relatively simple 3D game, I would go for Dx9. Otherwise Dx11.
[/quote]

I think I'll go DX10 cuz I don't want DX9, it is kinda old like I see it, and I can't run any f*cking sampals from the SDK.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='iYossi' timestamp='1311603024' post='4839993']
[quote name='Guns' timestamp='1311602856' post='4839989']
Ignore Dx10. On Dx11 You have something called "feature levels" that let you run on Dx10 and Dx9 hardware (the Dx9 level is a bit more limitied compared to original Dx9). If you want to write a 2D game or a relatively simple 3D game, I would go for Dx9. Otherwise Dx11.
[/quote]

I think I'll go DX10 cuz I don't want DX9, it is kinda old like I see it, and I can't run any f*cking sampals from the SDK.
[/quote]

lol.. 4 votes for 9, 5 votes for 11... 0 votes for 10.. and you'll go for 10 [img]http://public.gamedev.net/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif[/img]

forum users never stop to amaze me.

btw.. of course i voted for 11.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='kunos' timestamp='1311606885' post='4840017']
lol.. 4 votes for 9, 5 votes for 11... 0 votes for 10.. and you'll go for 10 [img]http://public.gamedev.net/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif[/img]

forum users never stop to amaze me.
[/quote]

In order to maintain faith in humanity I'm hoping that was a typo on his part :P

My vote? All the way up to 11 baby!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't fucking run a triangle! And I really don't want 9. But, OK. Anyone has any good tuts?
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly, calm the language down, there is no need for the swearing.

Secondly; what OS are you running? Are you drivers up to date?

Finally, run the examples via the debugger and see what errors it spits out, this might give you a clue as to why it isn't working.

The DX11 [b]API[/b] will work fine on your card assuming the OS and drivers are up to date and the examples are coded to use the feature levels correctly.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I once had the same card as you got! It was the Laptop-Version, though.

And yes, I developed using the DX11 API on that thing. :)


My friend, with a HD4890 had some problems with running DX11 stuff at feature level 10, though. But a driver update did the trick.
You should try that, too. Probably you're running some kind of driver from at least 100 years ago which doesn't even know what DX11 is.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='iYossi' timestamp='1311611014' post='4840035']
I can't fucking run a triangle! And I really don't want 9. But, OK. Anyone has any good tuts?
[/quote]

Just like you asked someone for an explanation as to why use "9", please give us an explanation as to why you "really don't want 9". Also, you can find good tuts in several places. Google and Bing are your friends. And if you would like help with why you "can't run a triangle", we'll need more information... does your code even compile and link? Does it crash somewhere? Does it run, but with a blank/black screen?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(no flame intended)

why don't you use opengl?
It'd run on windows xp vista & 7 (and on other platforms as well) you'd get full dx10 level features with that graphics card until you get a dx11 level card, and the transition would be seamless. You wouldn't have to worry about whether you're on XP or Vista or 7 you'd get the same visuals and same features... Plus, as I recently experienced, the two API are like twins (or at least DX 9 and OpenGL 2.1), the same features, same workflow, etc. Although I felt like dx was harder to learn due to the lack of good tutorials.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OpenGL has it's own share of driver problems, and besides: the OP has already evaluated the two and chosen Direct3D (see the first post) so the question is really irrelevant.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was actually aiming on OpenGL 3.x and unlike DX9/10/11, the was absoulutly NOTHING.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The decision is easy: If you want to run on Windows XP or Xbox 360: DX9. Else: DX11.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While DirectX 11 is the latest and obvious most "high tech" release of DirectX, as others have pointed out using DX10 or 11 will cripple your game on windows XP, aka it won't work. (DX10/11 is not supported on Windows XP)


Now if you're focus is not to sell to the "masses" and just learning for now go for the latest version that works on your machine.
Do take heed though and yes it is easy enough to write two rendering .dlls and attach your application to the proper one at load time based on the OS (slightly advanced topic) creating a game in DX9 is what I recommend as a starting foundation. It doesn't require half as many complexities as DX11 does in setting up or rendering and still teaches you the foundation.


You also can learn to use Pixel and Vertex Shaders once you have a firm grasp which is basically what DX11 requires for everything to be rendered. So transitioning to DX11 once you grasp DX9 will be fairly easy. Going backwards ... eh possible but the DX9 -> 11 , again in my opinion is easier. Don't have to swallow as much to get your first app up and running etc etc etc.
If you want to support Windows XP and plan on selling your game/app or having friends run your app if they don't have XP and you create it with DX11 well too bad for them. On the other hand this link:
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Desktop_and_laptop_computers"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Desktop_and_laptop_computers[/url]

while the %'s have shifted since that was last updated, I'm sure Vista/Win7 have not taken over in a combined % over XP and if you refuse to create the DirectX 9 rendering .dll (read above) you are in essence cutting out at least 1/2 of your potential buyer base which is crazy. You'll have to learn DirectX 9 anyways to support them, so might as well start there. :)
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='grazing' timestamp='1311633365' post='4840230']while the %'s have shifted since that was last updated, I'm sure Vista/Win7 have not taken over in a combined % over XP and if you refuse to create the DirectX 9 rendering .dll (read above) you are in essence cutting out at least 1/2 of your potential buyer base which is crazy. You'll have to learn DirectX 9 anyways to support them, so might as well start there. :)
[/quote]

According to the latest Steam hardware survey, users with both Vista/Win7 and DirectX 10/11 GPUs are now on 56%. Total Vista/Win7 is 71%/72%. XP is down to 20%. DX11 looks more like the reasonable choice every day.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mhagain' timestamp='1311637806' post='4840268']
[quote name='grazing' timestamp='1311633365' post='4840230']while the %'s have shifted since that was last updated, I'm sure Vista/Win7 have not taken over in a combined % over XP and if you refuse to create the DirectX 9 rendering .dll (read above) you are in essence cutting out at least 1/2 of your potential buyer base which is crazy. You'll have to learn DirectX 9 anyways to support them, so might as well start there. :)
[/quote]

According to the latest Steam hardware survey, users with both Vista/Win7 and DirectX 10/11 GPUs are now on 56%. Total Vista/Win7 is 71%/72%. XP is down to 20%. DX11 looks more like the reasonable choice every day.
[/quote]



You have a link to the survey? Wondering if it's a "poll." that was given e.g. the results will not be that accurate by a long shot. Only amongst those who voted.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OS + hardware data is generated by Steam itself, which queries the OS + drivers. They have the results here: [url="http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey"]http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey[/url]
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='MJP' timestamp='1311647024' post='4840342']
The OS + hardware data is generated by Steam itself, which queries the OS + drivers. They have the results here: [url="http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey"]http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey[/url]
[/quote]


So it's based on those who actually have this 'steam' installed. Gotcha.




Thank you for the link though. :)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another statistics form those who has installed Unity Web Player: http://unity3d.com/webplayer/hardware-stats.html
There XP is 51.7% from all Windows'es.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By Toastmastern
      So it's been a while since I took a break from my whole creating a planet in DX11. Last time around I got stuck on fixing a nice LOD.
      A week back or so I got help to find this:
      https://github.com/sp4cerat/Planet-LOD
      In general this is what I'm trying to recreate in DX11, he that made that planet LOD uses OpenGL but that is a minor issue and something I can solve. But I have a question regarding the code
      He gets the position using this row
      vec4d pos = b.var.vec4d["position"]; Which is then used further down when he sends the variable "center" into the drawing function:
      if (pos.len() < 1) pos.norm(); world::draw(vec3d(pos.x, pos.y, pos.z));  
      Inside the draw function this happens:
      draw_recursive(p3[0], p3[1], p3[2], center); Basically the 3 vertices of the triangle and the center of details that he sent as a parameter earlier: vec3d(pos.x, pos.y, pos.z)
      Now onto my real question, he does vec3d edge_center[3] = { (p1 + p2) / 2, (p2 + p3) / 2, (p3 + p1) / 2 }; to get the edge center of each edge, nothing weird there.
      But this is used later on with:
      vec3d d = center + edge_center[i]; edge_test[i] = d.len() > ratio_size; edge_test is then used to evaluate if there should be a triangle drawn or if it should be split up into 3 new triangles instead. Why is it working for him? shouldn't it be like center - edge_center or something like that? Why adding them togheter? I asume here that the center is the center of details for the LOD. the position of the camera if stood on the ground of the planet and not up int he air like it is now.

      Full code can be seen here:
      https://github.com/sp4cerat/Planet-LOD/blob/master/src.simple/Main.cpp
      If anyone would like to take a look and try to help me understand this code I would love this person. I'm running out of ideas on how to solve this in my own head, most likely twisted it one time to many up in my head
      Thanks in advance
      Toastmastern
       
       
    • By fllwr0491
      I googled around but are unable to find source code or details of implementation.
      What keywords should I search for this topic?
      Things I would like to know:
      A. How to ensure that partially covered pixels are rasterized?
         Apparently by expanding each triangle by 1 pixel or so, rasterization problem is almost solved.
         But it will result in an unindexable triangle list without tons of overlaps. Will it incur a large performance penalty?
      B. A-buffer like bitmask needs a read-modiry-write operation.
         How to ensure proper synchronizations in GLSL?
         GLSL seems to only allow int32 atomics on image.
      C. Is there some simple ways to estimate coverage on-the-fly?
         In case I am to draw 2D shapes onto an exisitng target:
         1. A multi-pass whatever-buffer seems overkill.
         2. Multisampling could cost a lot memory though all I need is better coverage.
            Besides, I have to blit twice, if draw target is not multisampled.
       
    • By mapra99
      Hello

      I am working on a recent project and I have been learning how to code in C# using OpenGL libraries for some graphics. I have achieved some quite interesting things using TAO Framework writing in Console Applications, creating a GLUT Window. But my problem now is that I need to incorporate the Graphics in a Windows Form so I can relate the objects that I render with some .NET Controls.

      To deal with this problem, I have seen in some forums that it's better to use OpenTK instead of TAO Framework, so I can use the glControl that OpenTK libraries offer. However, I haven't found complete articles, tutorials or source codes that help using the glControl or that may insert me into de OpenTK functions. Would somebody please share in this forum some links or files where I can find good documentation about this topic? Or may I use another library different of OpenTK?

      Thanks!
    • By Solid_Spy
      Hello, I have been working on SH Irradiance map rendering, and I have been using a GLSL pixel shader to render SH irradiance to 2D irradiance maps for my static objects. I already have it working with 9 3D textures so far for the first 9 SH functions.
      In my GLSL shader, I have to send in 9 SH Coefficient 3D Texures that use RGBA8 as a pixel format. RGB being used for the coefficients for red, green, and blue, and the A for checking if the voxel is in use (for the 3D texture solidification shader to prevent bleeding).
      My problem is, I want to knock this number of textures down to something like 4 or 5. Getting even lower would be a godsend. This is because I eventually plan on adding more SH Coefficient 3D Textures for other parts of the game map (such as inside rooms, as opposed to the outside), to circumvent irradiance probe bleeding between rooms separated by walls. I don't want to reach the 32 texture limit too soon. Also, I figure that it would be a LOT faster.
      Is there a way I could, say, store 2 sets of SH Coefficients for 2 SH functions inside a texture with RGBA16 pixels? If so, how would I extract them from inside GLSL? Let me know if you have any suggestions ^^.
    • By KarimIO
      EDIT: I thought this was restricted to Attribute-Created GL contexts, but it isn't, so I rewrote the post.
      Hey guys, whenever I call SwapBuffers(hDC), I get a crash, and I get a "Too many posts were made to a semaphore." from Windows as I call SwapBuffers. What could be the cause of this?
      Update: No crash occurs if I don't draw, just clear and swap.
      static PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR pfd = // pfd Tells Windows How We Want Things To Be { sizeof(PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR), // Size Of This Pixel Format Descriptor 1, // Version Number PFD_DRAW_TO_WINDOW | // Format Must Support Window PFD_SUPPORT_OPENGL | // Format Must Support OpenGL PFD_DOUBLEBUFFER, // Must Support Double Buffering PFD_TYPE_RGBA, // Request An RGBA Format 32, // Select Our Color Depth 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, // Color Bits Ignored 0, // No Alpha Buffer 0, // Shift Bit Ignored 0, // No Accumulation Buffer 0, 0, 0, 0, // Accumulation Bits Ignored 24, // 24Bit Z-Buffer (Depth Buffer) 0, // No Stencil Buffer 0, // No Auxiliary Buffer PFD_MAIN_PLANE, // Main Drawing Layer 0, // Reserved 0, 0, 0 // Layer Masks Ignored }; if (!(hDC = GetDC(windowHandle))) return false; unsigned int PixelFormat; if (!(PixelFormat = ChoosePixelFormat(hDC, &pfd))) return false; if (!SetPixelFormat(hDC, PixelFormat, &pfd)) return false; hRC = wglCreateContext(hDC); if (!hRC) { std::cout << "wglCreateContext Failed!\n"; return false; } if (wglMakeCurrent(hDC, hRC) == NULL) { std::cout << "Make Context Current Second Failed!\n"; return false; } ... // OGL Buffer Initialization glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT | GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); glBindVertexArray(vao); glUseProgram(myprogram); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, indexCount, GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, (void *)indexStart); SwapBuffers(GetDC(window_handle));  
  • Popular Now