Grand Theft Auto Running On Direct3D Natively On Linux Shows Gallium3D Potential

[Nille]

Yet still after all those years, most games just work with D3D9

Because of XP, but since 4 month XP has reached his EOL. And is not very wide used by Gamers since a long time.

and despite that they look awesome.

If you compare D3D9 Images and D3D10/11 Image you think different.

[Dukenukemx]

Because of XP, but since 4 month XP has reached his EOL. And is not very wide used by Gamers since a long time.

Less to do with XP and more to do with Xbox 360 and PS3. Since developers don't make games first for the PC they just make bad ports from those consoles. So they are mostly DX9 games with some DX10/11 additions.

If you compare D3D9 Images and D3D10/11 Image you think different.

For some games yes, but mostly unnoticeable. The big features of DX10 was better shadows, but most games that used them slowed to a crawl. Then AMD introduced DX10.1 and improved performance dramatically. Anyone remember the Tomb Raider DX10.1 patch that was removed? Anyway, DX11's big feature was tessellation, and the amount of games that use that feature I can count on my hands.

For the most part today DX10 is mostly ignored and DX11 is only used as a performance boost for some games. Any sophisticated feature used in modern games are only going to be included if Nvidia or AMD throws money towards developers. And for the most part anything Nvidia throws money any will become an exclusive feature for their hardware. So essentially most games are DX9.

[monohouse]

If you compare D3D9 Images and D3D10/11 Image you think different.

those images were deliberately put there to promote new windows OS sales

Because of XP, but since 4 month XP has reached his EOL. And is not very wide used by Gamers since a long time.

reached EOL or not I am still using it and will continue, perhaps not but I am one of those not wide used gamers and I play all my games there, I don't have multiboot with other windows and the only other multiboot I have is linux, windows 6/7/8 all sucks, I don't care what games or how many of them there are on those windows I will never use it

[widardd]

those images were deliberately put there to promote new windows OS sales



reached EOL or not I am still using it and will continue, perhaps not but I am one of those not wide used gamers and I play all my games there, I don't have multiboot with other windows and the only other multiboot I have is linux, windows 6/7/8 all sucks, I don't care what games or how many of them there are on those windows I will never use it

I shared your oppinion until i discovered games that officially support XP, but only offer renderpaths that seemed to not have gotten the same love, resulting in crashs.

(Path of Exile and The Secret World)

[smitty3268]

Yet still after all those years, most games just work with D3D9 and despite that they look awesome.

Most current games were designed to run on the XBox360, so it's not inconceivable that the days of games running D3D9 are coming to an end. Especially with XP now officially unsupported.

[monohouse]

console ports suck

there are many games that are not properly programmed, that always existed, so it is not a surprise that new games regardless of what rendering they are using will have bugs, and yes I would not bet on a game that is DX11 to work properly on DX9, but I put those games into the crap category and never look at them again, it's unfortunate that you were affected by it

smitty console ports suck and I would like to point out that the dedicated PC games (the ones that were programmed from the ground up for the PC) are DX9 games that is why those games work properly.
the games that are DX10/11/12 are console ports so many of them suck on PC, and that is a good reason for this project to take off (that being said, GTA 4 is a console port and yet I can see they managed to make it work properly)

[widardd]

the games that are DX10/11/12 are console ports so many of them suck on PC

What are you talking about? There is almost NO console port offering more than D3D9 BECAUSE neither ps3 nor 360 support anything above that.
You should be really grateful as a PC Gamer that ps4 and xone support the feature level of d3d11, and therefore will cause more games offering it in the feature. (like watch dogs or GTAV HD)

GF7 (PS3):
Rendering support
Direct3D Direct3D 9.0c

Xenos (360):
Support for a superset of DirectX 9.0c API DirectX Xbox 360, and Shader Model 3.0+

[Dukenukemx]

Most current games were designed to run on the XBox360, so it's not inconceivable that the days of games running D3D9 are coming to an end. Especially with XP now officially unsupported.

Most games are still being made for 360/PS3, so DX9 still has life left. Titanfall is for 360, which doesn't make it a next generation game.

What are you talking about? There is almost NO console port offering more than D3D9 BECAUSE neither ps3 nor 360 support anything above that.
You should be really grateful as a PC Gamer that ps4 and xone support the feature level of d3d11, and therefore will cause more games offering it in the feature. (like watch dogs or GTAV HD)

GF7 (PS3):
Rendering support
Direct3D Direct3D 9.0c

Xenos (360):
Support for a superset of DirectX 9.0c API DirectX Xbox 360, and Shader Model 3.0+

The PS4/Xbone have failed miserably in market share that for the first time ever in gaming history the developers are creating games for both 360/PS3 and Xbone/PS4. The most they offer is a remastered version of the games, which are just texture repacks. There's a pretty good chance the Xbox One will fail in the market within the year or two. It's clear that PC gaming is a stronger market than consoles. That wasn't the case with 360/PS3.

[widardd]

Most games are still being made for 360/PS3, so DX9 still has life left. Titanfall is for 360, which doesn't make it a next generation game.


The PS4/Xbone have failed miserably in market share that for the first time ever in gaming history the developers are creating games for both 360/PS3 and Xbone/PS4.

You misunderstand something. It is the first time ever that the new consoles offer NO backwards compatibility, therefore you have to do both. And you don't judge the success of a console at the beginning of its lifespan.

The most they offer is a remastered version of the games, which are just texture repacks.

I can understand that for consumer it may look like it, but there is way more in between than just huge textures and native from the ground up.

There's a pretty good chance the Xbox One will fail in the market within the year or two. It's clear that PC gaming is a stronger market than consoles. That wasn't the case with 360/PS3.

In fact it was, last time consoles had a slight advantage was 2008 iirc.

[Dukenukemx]

You misunderstand something. It is the first time ever that the new consoles offer NO backwards compatibility, therefore you have to do both. And you don't judge the success of a console at the beginning of its lifespan.

Super Nintendo wasn't backwards compatible with 8-bit Nintendo, nor was N64 or GameCube. Only Sony has a good track record for backwards compatibility, which stopped with the PS4. Even Sega with the Genesis to Saturn to Dreamcast wasn't backwards compatible.

You only need backwards compatibility if the console launch has mediocre games, like the PS4/Xbone. Not like the Genesis with Sonic or Snes with Super Mario, and N64 with Mario 64. Why anyone thinks Wii U was doing so poorly until Mario Kart 8? Took them that long to get a decent game for the thing.

I can understand that for consumer it may look like it, but there is way more in between than just huge textures and native from the ground up.

If I see a texture repack then it's a texture repack. Consumer doesn't care what horsing around was needed to get it working.