Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Feral Won't Say Yet If Their Newest Linux Game Will Support Vulkan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    tmpdir
    Senior Member

  • tmpdir
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post

    I know it's a relatively small percentage but there are some of us out there that are still on Fermi cards. Fermi cards that nvidia promised would get Vulkan support only to come back later and say, "Just kidding!" Fermi cards that we would upgrade to Pascal cards if there were actually any in stock like EVER.
    late reply, have been ofline for a while. But I make point of always replying to polite people

    This use case never crossed my mind, would indeed be a good reason.

    Leave a comment:

  • Tomin
    Senior Member

  • Tomin
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Fermi cards that we would upgrade to Pascal cards if there were actually any in stock like EVER.
    I would upgrade to newer Radeon if it didn't cost much and I still got the same FPS on CS:GO. My GTX460 is still fast enough (sadly just with proprietary drivers), but for my other desktop I'm likely to replace the HD6670 with something Polaris next year when Zen is released. I don't think I'm buying any new Nvidia cards any more as AMD has so good open source support.

    Leave a comment:

  • johnc
    Official X.org Fanboy

  • johnc
    replied
    Originally posted by tmpdir View Post
    don't see how you can only reach a fraction of a user base using vulkan compared to only using opengl on linux, I trully don't know anyone that uses linux and is not aware how to upgrade their drivers.
    I know it's a relatively small percentage but there are some of us out there that are still on Fermi cards. Fermi cards that nvidia promised would get Vulkan support only to come back later and say, "Just kidding!" Fermi cards that we would upgrade to Pascal cards if there were actually any in stock like EVER.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • Guest
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Xaero_Vincent View Post
    Metal was a natural choice for macOS because OpenGL is locked at 4.1 there and the game may need extensions only found in newer GL specs. I think MoltenVK (Vulkan on Metal) would be the better choice so that Mac and Linux could share a Vulkan code path and simplify the porting process.
    If os x doesn't support vulkan then screw os x. Vulkan is supported on Linux and Windows.

    Leave a comment:

  • tmpdir
    Senior Member

  • tmpdir
    replied
    don't see how you can only reach a fraction of a user base using vulkan compared to only using opengl on linux, I trully don't know anyone that uses linux and is not aware how to upgrade their drivers.

    Having said this, I don't think they go the vulkan path. They would have announced it for marketing purposes already.

    Leave a comment:

  • theghost
    Senior Member

  • theghost
    replied
    I don't think they will use Vulkan but that is no problem. I can understand if they wouldn't target it.
    As a porting company I wouldn't target Vulkan now. Drivers are too immature. You can only reach a fraction of a user base that is already pretty small.
    Especially if you have a DirectX - OpenGl wrapper, you would just extend it. Everything else would cost too much. And you know what, it's ok. Everyone can live with it.
    Who cares if a handful people would like to see a port to Vulkan just to run some benchmarks.

    It would be another thing if the original game would be written in Vulkan but that's not the case here. So what...

    Leave a comment:

  • c117152
    Senior Member

  • c117152
    replied
    Possible interpretations in order of likelihood:
    1. I don't know. No one cares about what API we're using to even bother mentioning it. I'm just a talking head I look it up but the devs are mean to me and make fun of me so I'm not going to push for it.
    2. Licensing issues prohibit us from saying it's Vulkan until we sign a trademark deal with the Khronos group.
    3. We're targeting SDL but haven't gotten around the low level bits yet.
    4. It's outsourced to someone I don't know and can't get their number to ask. See point 1.
    5. We licensed the engine from a 3rd party and are NDAed about it.
    6. Linux port? We haven't even finished the game let alone the mac port. Besides, we don't have a single person in the engine team that has a clue how to walk gdb and no one is in a rush to learn. Give it 6 months of patches and maybe someone will be bothered to look it up.

    Leave a comment:

  • rabcor
    Senior Member

  • rabcor
    replied
    I hope they will... in fact I hope they just make their own lives easier and use this: https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/

    Leave a comment:

  • smitty3268
    Senior Member

  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by nomadewolf View Post
    is it just me, or had they opted for vulkan on windows, that would save them a lot of work?
    also isn't there some project to make vulkan work on the mac?
    or maybe the industry just chooses to ignore metal and force Apple to embrace Vulkan or GTFO...
    Feral didn't write any of the Windows code. They don't get a say in how the game was originally designed, they're just getting a cut of sales from porting it.

    Leave a comment:

  • eydee
    Senior Member

  • eydee
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    A port to Vulkan would be a waste of man hours that would probably be better off spent on porting another game.
    Porting the DX12 code path to Vulkan should be less work than DX11 to OpenGL. Especially if it's just an internal wrapper, not an engine that "thinks" with DX12/Vulkan in mind. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be Vulkan-only, no OpenGL at all. Pretty much all GPUs that have a chance to run the game do support Vulkan at this point.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X