Gabe Newell says DX10 for Vista was a mistake

Arhh well, wont DX 11 be out soon? :p

ooo i'm one of 2.3%, now to get more ram so that i feel like i should be part of the eilte.

And if this DX fails does this mean that it will effectively kill PC gaming or just hold it in DX9 until 11 comes out or a console support 10...

I'm one of those 2.3 percent as well. And my PC is waaay up in the high end!

My bank account is weeping silently in a corner somewhere though...

Originally Posted by will.
I'm one of those 2.3 percent as well. And my PC is waaay up in the high end!

My bank account is weeping silently in a corner somewhere though...

So i'm guessing not many bit-tech people took that survey or the results might be slightly different. And aren't all bank accounts weeping after their owners discover bit-tech and a desire to mod?

Microsoft’s choice to limit DirectX 10 to Windows Vista was “a terrible mistake”.

In other news: water is wet!

Gabe Newell also complained about dual core processors. As much as I love his games, the man is just a whiney arsehole.
Adoption of new DX versions is always a bit slow, especially when the last version was so excellent.

Developers should stop bitching about it and start making use of it!

I'm sure it was the same with the new DX9 from 8 when we got XP (it did happen like that didn't it? I cant remember perfectly now).

bloody developers, get on with it! (that goes for the ones I'm working with at the moment as well, you rat *******s, get on with it!!) ahem, </rant>

Well I'm staying on WinXP with my DX9 as Vista/DX10 is just not worth the extra money/upgrade. I hope and pray MS release DX10 or 11 for XP as that will be the only time I will upgrade tbh.

Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser

I'm sure it was the same with the new DX9 from 8 when we got XP (it did happen like that didn't it? I cant remember perfectly now).

DX9 wasnt limited to XP stopping Win2k users from using it though.

But consoles have nothing to do with directX, it's a PC only thing isn't it? There should be no reason why DX10 features can't be used on the 360 and PS3 AFAIK, with the exception that the GPUs aren't designed with DX10 features in mind. But I'm sure I read somewhere it's possible.

Apparently DX10 is available on XP 64bit, so maybe is rather wrong, ha ha.

Sam

Originally Posted by Veles
But consoles have nothing to do with directX, it's a PC only thing isn't it? There should be no reason why DX10 features can't be used on the 360 and PS3 AFAIK, with the exception that the GPUs aren't designed with DX10 features in mind. But I'm sure I read somewhere it's possible.

It is. The reason the Xbox360 is getting so many ports like Bioshock is that it's dx9, it was developed to be like the PC.
The PS3 uses OpenGL (with some added insturctions I think) and the Wii probably uses OpenGL too.

Without an API like DX of OGL console gaming would be pretty dead, there would be no way to develop games cheaply and effectively.

Just out of interest, is there any news on the dual-core Source update? I'm yet to play HL2:Ep1...wanting to wait until my C2D will be utilised to it's full potential (seems a bit of a waste only using 50% CPU time).

I don't think the Wii does use Open GL... But otherwise that's bang on, the 360's GPU is Direct X 9 only.

Originally Posted by riggs
Just out of interest, is there any news on the dual-core Source update? I'm yet to play HL2:Ep1...wanting to wait until my C2D will be utilised to it's full potential (seems a bit of a waste only using 50% CPU time).

It really won't make the game any better, I'd play it now

Originally Posted by K
I don't think the Wii does use Open GL... But otherwise that's bang on, the 360's GPU is Direct X 9 only.

The 360's GPU has similar capabilities to DX9, but it's not DX9. There are some extra things it can do that DX9 GPUs can't and there are other things that it can - that's why Microsoft provides the XNA developer suite, so that devs can port 360 games to PC with relative ease. What it isn't though is simply plugging the 360 code into a PC and getting it to work.

I agree with Gabe that it was a mistake to release dx10 only on vista. If it would have been released on XP also, there would have been more support for it from the gamedevelopers. Why should they invest to create a dx10 game for 2.3% people.

Dont get me wrong i realy love to see some real dx10 bases eyecandy, i have a 88x waiting for it. I first thought that bioshock had some, but appearently there is not any difference. I saw a lot of screenshots comparisons on some forum. (i think it was the 2kgames forum, not sure) That was a mayor downer. Especialy that a dx9 game can look that good.

Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan
I agree with Gabe that it was a mistake to release dx10 only on vista. If it would have been released on XP also, there would have been more support for it from the gamedevelopers. Why should they invest to create a dx10 game for 2.3% people.

Dont get me wrong i realy love to see some real dx10 bases eyecandy, i have a 88x waiting for it. I first thought that bioshock had some, but appearently there is not any difference. I saw a lot of screenshots comparisons on some forum. (i think it was the 2kgames forum, not sure) That was a mayor downer. Especialy that a dx9 game can look that good.

We'll have some info on this soon... I've been working like a nutter to get this BioShock PC evaluation done :)

Originally Posted by Tim S
The 360's GPU has similar capabilities to DX9, but it's not DX9. There are some extra things it can do that DX9 GPUs can't and there are other things that it can - that's why Microsoft provides the XNA developer suite, so that devs can port 360 games to PC with relative ease. What it isn't though is simply plugging the 360 code into a PC and getting it to work.

Well yeah, I just meant it's not gonna be doing any DirectX 10 stuff basically.

Although only 2.3% are "DX10 ready", apparently 4.56% have Nvidia 8800's (presumably half of the owners don't feel that the upgrade to vista is worthwhile yet, or possibly a lot of dual-boot configurations?).

Nice to see i'm one of only 576 users out of 1,092,762 that has an ATi Crossfire setup on Steam :)

Originally Posted by frontline
Although only 2.3% are "DX10 ready", apparently 4.56% have Nvidia 8800's (presumably half of the owners don't feel that the upgrade to vista is worthwhile yet, or possibly a lot of dual-boot configurations?).

Nice to see i'm one of only 576 users out of 1,092,762 that has an ATi Crossfire setup on Steam :)

I agree, there are a lot of people waiting for a reason to upgrade to Vista... and as good as BioShock is, I don't think it's worth paying £100+ for a new OS on top of the £25 for the game because although there are image quality benefits, they're incredibly subtle like we've seen with most of the DX10 content that's been released so far.

Welcome to the forums ;)

edit: frontline beat me to it

Thanks for the welcome :)

I agree that the DX10 effects seen so far have been subtle improvements and am interested to see how far Crysis pushes this (and at what cost to playable frame-rates).

Of concern to a lot of my gaming friends is the move towards shader model 3.0 being a compulsory part of the minimum required specification for recent games (Bioshock and the MOHAA demo included). This excludes some early DX9 cards which are SM 2.0 only. You then have a crazy situation where an Radeon X800 can't run the game, whereas a Radeon X1300 will be compliant, albeit with single figure frame-rates.

Release multiple DX10 titles that will make a purchase of Vista & a new card worth it & THEN people will start buying DX10 cards/games, but until then people are going to stick with the current best....

I very, very strongly support Mr. Newell's comment. Also, someone mentioned D3D10 for game consoles. That really isn't needed as game consoles can emulate DirectX10 functionality quite well in what we can provisionally refer to as 'D3D9 for consoles'.

Originally Posted by frontline
Although only 2.3% are "DX10 ready", apparently 4.56% have Nvidia 8800's (presumably half of the owners don't feel that the upgrade to vista is worthwhile yet, or possibly a lot of dual-boot configurations?).

i have an 8800 but no vista, and have no current plans to get it in the future

DX9 is going to be around for 5-6 years IMO due to this, so i see no rush for vista

I'm currently building myself a DX10 capapable PC but I won't be running Vista for a very long time, I want to max out all my fav DX9 games on my 24" widescreen and soak up the drool inducing visuals. Once they sort out the problems with Vista I might think about switching but not until at least SP1.

Dual boot? Asking for trouble if you want my opinion. One O/S is enough to deal with without adding a second.

Valve Orange box - my first instinct is to say Ep2 but I do have a sneaking desire to have a go at Portal, the demo looked like a barrel of fun.

Team Fortress Classic 2 all the way! This game looks fantastic....

pff such DX 9 and 10 and even 11 crap, people like me have no worries about problems like these *hugs his DX 8.1 card and his unmicrosoft OS*. In other news, OpenGL 3 has been announced, so I'll wait for cards with OpenGL 3 integrated cards. If someone's got some DDR400 lying around, I'll be willing to take those in tho.

I'm looking forward to HL2:EP2!

ATI was an year late with SM3 cards Nvidia supported SM3 at lest from 5200 (more of an addon for 5200) and higher (pointless tho as its very underpowred card) i think the 6200 had full hardware support for SM3

ATI thay was very late in the game getting SM3 cards out as late as getting there DX10 cards out that was an disapointment unlike there x1950 cards that was very good

to play games on Vista at good speeds you need an new fast pc +4gb of ram + the WDDM patch to stop runaway video from been used on vista,
i got XP and vista dual booting and my games perform better and faster on XP then thay do on vista (and do not crash and some times take the pc out with it...)

the only good thing i can say about it if your not playing games it works fine
as long as you do not pop in any software thats any more then 1 year old or some/alot EA games and as long as you do not install any Malware (toolbars, error safe, vxcodec and so on heh) as it only works on XP and will cripple vista and you need to reload windows even if you remove the malware in the last 4 pcs i done

i not even Sell vista at this time as i cant just clean the pc up and get it going i have to wast 2 hrs haveing to reload back up and restore (any know if Norton GoBack works with Vista not been able to obtane an copy yet to test it on vista as the system restore on vista is as bad as XP in the way it does not work when you have an real problem)

No point in me really upgrading atm and from what I've seen directx 10 kills frame rates, will go to vista in the future just not my time yet.

Originally Posted by leexgx
ATI was an year late with SM3 cards Nvidia supported SM3 at lest from 5200 (more of an addon for 5200) and higher (pointless tho as its very underpowred card) i think the 6200 had full hardware support for SM3

ATI thay was very late in the game getting SM3 cards out as late as getting there DX10 cards out that was an disapointment unlike there x1950 cards that was very good

to play games on Vista at good speeds you need an new fast pc +4gb of ram + the WDDM patch to stop runaway video from been used on vista,
i got XP and vista dual booting and my games perform better and faster on XP then thay do on vista (and do not crash and some times take the pc out with it...)

the only good thing i can say about it if your not playing games it works fine
as long as you do not pop in any software thats any more then 1 year old or some/alot EA games and as long as you do not install any Malware (toolbars, error safe, vxcodec and so on heh) as it only works on XP and will cripple vista and you need to reload windows even if you remove the malware in the last 4 pcs i done

i not even Sell vista at this time as i cant just clean the pc up and get it going i have to wast 2 hrs haveing to reload back up and restore (any know if Norton GoBack works with Vista not been able to obtane an copy yet to test it on vista as the system restore on vista is as bad as XP in the way it does not work when you have an real problem)

I can run games fine and I have a cruddy 1 year old system.

Haven't heard of DX11, and I doubt it'll come soon but i know for a fact DX10.1 is arriving in SP1. So if you feel like buying a graphics card in 6-12 months then I suggest you wait for one with DX10.1 and OGL 3 support.

What's the big deal about DX10 anyway? We haven't even got a graphics card yet that can run DX10 games at decent framerates...

Originally Posted by Ramble

Haven't heard of DX11, and I doubt it'll come soon but i know for a fact DX10.1 is arriving in SP1. So if you feel like buying a graphics card in 6-12 months then I suggest you wait for one with DX10.1 and OGL 3 support.

probly what i wait for but not wanting my 8800 Drop in price to much tho as i like to sell my old hw for better cards

openGL 3 should be good (openGL 2 games just does not seem to even compare to DX9 games any more or its just the way devs program games)

I don't think the problem is with Vista having DX10 only. Even if it was ported to XP, the percentage shown in the article would possibly increase, but nit that much, as most people don't have a directX 10 compatible video card either way. Even in this such community as here, I am sure if a survey is done, most people don't have a DirectX 10 compatible video card. And I'm not talking about one that is powerful enough to play the game on med-high to max settings.

I agree that limiting DX10 to Vista was some sort of mistake. But MS did it to Sell it new OS to gamers but do they know that good DX10 Capable Cards cost a lot - I have to say that 8600/8500/2600/2400 cards are a big dissapoitment atm but hopefully with the new 9xxx Series from Nvidia and maybe something from AMD this will change. Also there is this "Wow I need 2 GB of RAM to make my mouse move in Vista :D" and also "Microsoft is sorry for the inconvenience but your PC is out of date and incompatible with Vista - Try using and older OS and SHUT UP :D". I am also like the majority of users using XP. It runs just fine now and there are a lot of titles to choose from. There are quite a lot of games coming out this year (Bioshock already out but my machine is too much outta date) that are DX10 Capable but work on XP too. Develepors are supporting XP because the majority of users that play games have DX9 Cards (atm High End DX9 Hardware has a nice price tag). So I personaly see Vista coming to the majority maybe next year when 4GB DDR2/3 Will cost around 100-150$ and the new DX10 Capable Mainstream Cards offer better performance than current - because now there is such a big gap between 8800 and 8600 for instance. Also there are the power requirements - 550W good quality PSU is required to support a Dual Core Rig@3000+ Mhz 2GBs of RAM, at least one 250/320 HDD and a Compatible MB and such a 8800 card - I want a PC not a toaster.

Originally Posted by proxess
pff such DX 9 and 10 and even 11 crap, people like me have no worries about problems like these *hugs his DX 8.1 card and his unmicrosoft OS*. In other news, OpenGL 3 has been announced, so I'll wait for cards with OpenGL 3 integrated cards. If someone's got some DDR400 lying around, I'll be willing to take those in tho.

I'm looking forward to HL2:EP2!

I know your pain man :). Ubuntu is a very nice OS. The only reason I am not using it is because I play Frozen Throne and there are much problems with running it. Anyway I am currently upgrading (still thinking it though) and will probably use Ubuntu on my current pc. Also yours is not the oldest machine on bit-tech anymore :D