• 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
ongamex92

DirectX 12 Announced

79 posts in this topic

"For nearly 20 years, DirectX has been the platform used by game developer's to create the fastest, most visually impressive games on the planet. However, you asked us to do more. You asked us to bring you even closer to the metal and to do so on an unparalleled assortment of hardware."

 

 

(my highlights added for clarity)

 

Maybe it's taking ideas from AMD's Mantle (or developed alongside...) to give better direct access to the hardware more akin to consoles.

 

Edit: and possibly a Windows 9 exclusive?

Edited by mark ds
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not massively, but I am curious. With current console hardware pegged to Dx11, Dx12 is likely to go the same way as Dx10 - largely ignored.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zero surprise.

 

MS announced years ago that DirectX was no longer a secondary component and had been integrated to the Windows API. They started doing it with Vista back in 2006 (8 years ago). When people kept asking when the next release would be they more formally announced the policy change about 4 years ago because some people didn't seem to see they were tying it to the SDK releases.

 

With the SDK update scheduled for April, having a DX announcement in March feels like non-news. Maybe if they were announcing a back-port to all the old supported versions of Windows it would be news, but given their recent stance I seriously doubt it is anything more than an announcement that 12 is the new version number.

Edited by frob
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe it's taking ideas from AMD's Mantle (or developed alongside...) to give better direct access to the hardware more akin to consoles.

 

Edit: and possibly a Windows 9 exclusive?

 

 

Yeah, that's my guess too. Looking at the history of DirectX from 9 to 11 that would be a likely direction for them. This applies for both performance and control and exclusivity

 

But if by some miracle they make the new DirectX available under Windows 7 and up, I will officially bury the hatchet, forget my recent animosity gained towards Microsoft and they will also acquire a huge buffer of good will, enough for one Microsoft employee to shit weekly on my doorstep for at least a year.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not massively, but I am curious. With current console hardware pegged to Dx11, Dx12 is likely to go the same way as Dx10 - largely ignored.

 

At least the Xbox One (and presumably PS4), goes beyond D3D 11.1, perhaps even 11.2 -- how much further is the stuff of NDAs, but it could be entirely possible that DX12 doesn't introduce new required hardware features -- it could just be a more-efficient API for accessing the existing features, and with possibly some additional non-required features. They did away with CAPS bits, but there are still mechanisms for having optional features.

 

At any rate, OS support will end up being the driving/detracting factor anyhow, more-so than whether the console supports it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am not holding my breath for Win7 support, that's for sure.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD: "There will be no Directx 12" ( Actual statement )

 

IMHO, there is. ( I hope ) tongue.png

 

EDIT: It seems like AMD is a sponsor...

Edited by Migi0027
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off-topic, but something I'm confused about with AMD Mantle - how can they give you this "closer to the metal" API without requiring you to write code specific for different hardware? I've read a lot of hype about Mantle, mainly from AMD, but I don't quite get how it can outperform, say, DX, while maintaining the same level of abstraction.

 

Just wondered what people's thoughts/knowledge on this subject were?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw an over 1 hour long talk and read some materials and that lead me to believe that the level of abstraction will be lowered, except for the creation of resources, which seems to be higher. You'll request more general resources and the entire validation is done a creation time and the result uploaded to the GPU, but then have finer control on what to do with them. But I think that Mantle will have a much higher batch count at that's about for straight advantages. Maybe some quality of life. I also believe that raw Mantle code will be longer that the equivalent DirectX. Anyway, I can't wait to try it out. Need to get my hands on an AMD GPU first.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read a lot of hype about Mantle, mainly from AMD, but I don't quite get how it can outperform, say, DX, while maintaining the same level of abstraction.

It doesn't maintain the same level of abstraction.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every single time a new iteration of dx was announced,everybody was complaining about os support....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care much any more.

 

I loved Direct3D, I adored the fact that we had a great API with fantastic driver and tool support.  Microsoft wrecked that.

 

The artificial tying of D3D versions to Windows OS versions for marketing rather than technical reasons destroyed it.  The breaking changes destroyed it.  The nosedive in documentation quality destroyed it.

 

Start by reversing the Windows OS version dependency.  Give us D3D12 on Windows 7 with a simple upgrade that doesn't break other stuff.  Then I'll start getting excited.  But right now there's too much damage to be undone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Driver model changes are a marketing reason? Huh, you learn something new every day.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[I merged the two D3D12 threads, hopefully that hasn't thrown post ordering too much out of whack]
 



At least the Xbox One (and presumably PS4), goes beyond D3D 11.1, perhaps even 11.2

I've read other reports that say that the Xbone provides a superset of the D3D11.1 feature-set, and the the PS4 provides a superset of the D3D11.2 feature-set.
 
Unfortunately NDAs prevent confirming or denying such statements though... wink.png

it could be entirely possible that DX12 doesn't introduce new required hardware features -- it could just be a more-efficient API for accessing the existing features

If it's D3D11.2, with some of the unnecessary abstraction cut away, with Windows 7 support... then that would be about the best I could hope for biggrin.png
 

with AMD Mantle - how can they give you this "closer to the metal" API without requiring you to write code specific for different hardware? I've read a lot of hype about Mantle, mainly from AMD, but I don't quite get how it can outperform, say, DX, while maintaining the same level of abstraction.

D3D/GL both provide an unecessary amount of abstraction. Largely around command-buffer generation, submission of work to the GPU's front-end, and management of "video memory".
 
We've all got this idea that we've got to give buffers to the API, and have it schedule an "upload" to the GPU at some point. For the longest time though, things haven't really worked that way. The OS can map device-memory into a processes address space -- 0x12345678 might be a pointer you get back from malloc that's stored in main/system RAM, and 0x12349876 might be an address inside the GPU's RAM. If your CPU-side code tries to write to that address, you'll be sending data across the bus and into the GPU.
A GPU resource, like a texture for example, is just a very small header (e.g. a few in32's) and a pointer to the data (which may or may not be in vram). Those two things are all you really need to pass to the API. The API also doesn't need a "CreateTexture" function at all; it just needs malloc, and a function to initialize your header structures. Given that kind of API, all the resource management falls into the hands of the engine, rather than the driver's best guesses.
 

Driver model changes are a marketing reason? Huh, you learn something new every day.

XP->Vista introduced a new driver model. D3D10/11 still could've been implemented for XP if they cared about supporting it though... e.g. GL4 exposes all the D11 functionality on XP...

 

More recently: There's no reason to restrict the D3D11.1 update to Windows 8!

Edited by Hodgman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D3D/GL both provide an unecessary amount of abstraction. Largely around command-buffer generation, submission of work to the GPU's front-end, and management of "video memory".

There's nothing wrong with abstraction, the problem is the lack of a way to go around it for those who really know what they're doing.

 

XP->Vista introduced a new driver model. D3D10/11 still could've been implemented for XP if they cared about supporting it though... e.g. GL4 exposes all the D11 functionality on XP...

I'm sure it could have been, but there's a lot more than marketing going on there. Agree on 11.1 restrictions being a bit silly, even if it's not just marketing either (new WDDM and DXGI versions).

Edited by Mona2000
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

XP->Vista introduced a new driver model. D3D10/11 still could've been implemented for XP if they cared about supporting it though... e.g. GL4 exposes all the D11 functionality on XP...

I'm sure it could have been, but there's a lot more than marketing going on there. Agree on 11.1 restrictions being a bit silly, even if it's not just marketing either (new WDDM and DXGI versions).

 

 

Marketing isn't the right word for it. There are multiple. "Agenda" is one for it.

 

It is perfectly fine to introduce new models and break compatibility once in a while. The driver model change in Vista was sorely needed. When something really need improvement, it should be improved.

 

But their current actions betray an agenda, not them seeing a need for improvement. They are practically strong arming you into upgrading. Sure, it is always easier to not back-port changes, but I'm sure the current management would even prevent those back-ports is possible. They need to sell Windows 9. They need to reach with again numbers like in the glory periods, even though with current PC sales trends that is not possible even if Windows 9 is the best Windows yet. I have Windows 8 and it is a piece of crap, especially for gaming and engine development. Whatever support for miss-behaving fullscreen applications was in the OD previously, "Metro" gutted it. I often need to log out because the desktop app can't handle a full-screen app doing stupid stuff. Well, at least I could never crash the GPU driver like I could under 7 :).

 

But being tied down to a version of a software sucks. I'm not die hard by principle, but I'll probably end up the last DirectX 9 user in the world. Every time I try to port stuff and do dual maintenance, something does not work.

 

Anyway, screw stubborn principles. I'm upgrading right now to Windows 8.1. The reason I  did not update until now was I that mistakenly believed you needed an account for it. I was just about ready to create my account, when I happily noticed it would let me download the update without it.

 

I have over 40 account that are all important. Does anybody else have problems with modern social media and services presence and the number of accounts you need?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyway, screw stubborn principles. I'm upgrading right now to Windows 8.1. The reason I  did not update until now was I that mistakenly believed you needed an account for it. I was just about ready to create my account, when I happily noticed it would let me download the update without it.

 

Done. After over a year or so with Windows 8, I am no longer excited about the return of the start menu. It is actually worse than before, because it is not useful. I had the Win key before, does the same thing, but wasted screen estate.

 

And WTF did the installer do? I have +10 GiB of free space now on my Windows partition.

 

Anyway, back on topic. Is it possible to try out Mantle? Could anyone not working for software partners get their hands on it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

XP->Vista introduced a new driver model. D3D10/11 still could've been implemented for XP if they cared about supporting it though... e.g. GL4 exposes all the D11 functionality on XP...

I'm sure it could have been, but there's a lot more than marketing going on there. Agree on 11.1 restrictions being a bit silly, even if it's not just marketing either (new WDDM and DXGI versions).

 

I'd say that it is marketing reasons.  D3D10 may have been dependent on the new driver model, but that opens the question: "why not implement the new driver model on XP?"  Whichever way you cut it, it's excuses all the way down.  Microsoft want to sell more copies of their new OS, games are a big market, by artificially tying D3D version to OS version only gamers with the new OS will get the latest-and-greatest, therefore more games will want to buy the new OS, therefore Microsoft will sell more copies of the new OS.  Which was all quite transparent back then and remains so now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think that MS THINKS that tying D3D to Windows version will sell more games.  But to be honest I think for the most part it just slows adoption of the newer APIs by devs.  D3D11 is really nice, and can support a huge range of hardware, and his been around a long time, but only recently has it become 'the standard'.  These antics by MS do more harm to them in the long run IMO.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think that MS THINKS that tying D3D to Windows version will sell more games.  But to be honest I think for the most part it just slows adoption of the newer APIs by devs.  D3D11 is really nice, and can support a huge range of hardware, and his been around a long time, but only recently has it become 'the standard'.  These antics by MS do more harm to them in the long run IMO.

This is my opinion as well, and I think that strategy likely ends up forcing many people away from directx entirely. If directx 12 turns out to be exclusive to windows 8+ then it’ll be useless to me as a developer. I’m still using windows 7 and so is a large portion of the market, so no matter what improvements they add in 12, it’ll be a choice between abandoning a really significant percentage of potential users or sticking with an earlier version of directx or OpenGL. (not a hard choice)

0

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