Wine-Staging Adds 1D Textures For D3D10/D3D11

[karolherbst]

pal666 what did you mean by "feral wraps sources" ? Feral ports are still slower then windows in any case, it's the same way as VP

btw I think VP has bad press because of Witcher2 which is still heavy game even on Windows and probably most demanding on Linux (and probably is really bad port
And when you read everywhere: "VP is bad, they are wrapping binary" you start believe that VP is even worse than MS

the main problem is, they can't fix the game engine, so if the game engine behaves like an asshole, they have to hack around that. Feral doesn't have that problem, because they can simply fix the engine.

[Ehvis]

All of Feral's ports are using a DX11 wrapper too and no one seems to acknowledge this, even Michael just constantly benchmarks Feral games and goes "huh, well, it's slower than Windows, the same as running it in Wine without CSMT!" and well yeah. Not sure how they've avoided the bad press of VP when VP's wrapper actually seems to work better in many cases.

All VP ports I've played were glitchy. From minor graphical issues to control problems. TW2 was the worst. The terrible performance also made the controls terrible and the game unplayable. Maybe their newer ones are better, but I haven't tried those yet. Feral ports have never had that for me. Performance was not the best, but it was always playable. I think Shadow of Mordor does pretty well in comparison. Which means that they can improve things if they put more effort (and of course money) into it.

Of course the "wrapper" becomes pretty vague when it happens at source level. Apart from the open source OpenGL stuff, there is not a game out there which isn't wrapped to some extent. After all, most game engines are written and optimised for DX9/11. They are never full reimplemented in OpenGL from the ground up and performance is lost when OpenGL is bolted on afterwards.

[eydee]

All VP ports I've played were glitchy. From minor graphical issues to control problems. TW2 was the worst. The terrible performance also made the controls terrible and the game unplayable. Maybe their newer ones are better, but I haven't tried those yet. Feral ports have never had that for me. Performance was not the best, but it was always playable. I think Shadow of Mordor does pretty well in comparison. Which means that they can improve things if they put more effort (and of course money) into it.

Of course the "wrapper" becomes pretty vague when it happens at source level. Apart from the open source OpenGL stuff, there is not a game out there which isn't wrapped to some extent. After all, most game engines are written and optimised for DX9/11. They are never full reimplemented in OpenGL from the ground up and performance is lost when OpenGL is bolted on afterwards.

Unfortunately the windows version is the same, the VP port is a direct copy of it, even at the binary level. All those performance and control issues plague the original one too. Performance is of course a bit lower under linux because of the overhead, but that's it. Most of the rest is in the game.

[karolherbst]

Unfortunately the windows version is the same, the VP port is a direct copy of it, even at the binary level. All those performance and control issues plague the original one too. Performance is of course a bit lower under linux because of the overhead, but that's it. Most of the rest is in the game.

Well at least I can say that under Nouveau the VP ports run worse than the Feral runs, which all run really well performance wise. Allthough Bioshock infinite ran under Nouveau without any issues as well (except performance was around 65% compared to nvidia) since one week after Linux release.

But maybe due to the publisher don't care about end user issues, they end up getting port by VP and every publisher who cares ports through Feral. Such an idea.

[bug77]

Unfortunately the windows version is the same, the VP port is a direct copy of it, even at the binary level. All those performance and control issues plague the original one too. Performance is of course a bit lower under linux because of the overhead, but that's it. Most of the rest is in the game.

I don't know, I've played through that game three times (on Windows). Yes, it's demanding, but I've never struggled with controls. My trusty 660Ti gets acceptable frame rates (above 40) with everything maxed out, except for ubersampling.

[pal666]

pal666 what did you mean by "feral wraps sources" ?

i mean they have game sources, vp have windows binary

Feral ports are still slower then windows in any case

of course they have to adapt directx game to opengl. doing it flawlessly requires manpower

[AJSB]

I stopped using (")native(") Linux ports and i now only use WINE.

Why ?

I figured out that they are all C**P riddled with bugs and most, if not all, modern Linux ports are NOT Native at ALL and are using wrappers.

In that case, i might as well use WINE and have same, if not better, performance with LESS bugs.

Even old true Native ports like ETQW have some weird quirk, like to anti-aliasing option in menu (have to use config file to solve problem ) and lists screen resolutions not supported by monitor. NONE of these problems happens via WINE.

Funny thing is that, at least w/ APUs, ETQW via WINE works better than Native windows version in W7, W8 or W10 (only XP might be slightly faster but not smoother, in that aspect, XP & WINE are the same).

[AJSB]

PS:
I meant "... like NO anti-aliasing option in menu..."

[artivision]

I stopped using (")native(") Linux ports and i now only use WINE.

Why ?

I figured out that they are all C**P riddled with bugs and most, if not all, modern Linux ports are NOT Native at ALL and are using wrappers.

In that case, i might as well use WINE and have same, if not better, performance with LESS bugs.

Even old true Native ports like ETQW have some weird quirk, like to anti-aliasing option in menu (have to use config file to solve problem ) and lists screen resolutions not supported by monitor. NONE of these problems happens via WINE.

Funny thing is that, at least w/ APUs, ETQW via WINE works better than Native windows version in W7, W8 or W10 (only XP might be slightly faster but not smoother, in that aspect, XP & WINE are the same).

WineHQ is as fast as your system combination. In my 3110m-8670m laptop with Prime and Gallium Nine, gives around 60-70% efficiency. In my desktop Pentium Haswell unlocked 4.6ghz and HD-7790 1.1ghz gives 90% efficiency. For some reason i don't know Wine has CPU overhead that is unrelated with Gallium drivers and state trackers and only partially related to GLSL translator. Something is wrong between the Wine api implementation and the way Wine is builded. Probably something is also wrong with Intel back-ends and compiler optimizations to. I'm waiting to see if Amd Zen behaves the same way.

[Linuxxx]

AJSB
The problem with Wine gaming going forward is going to be the infamous DENUVO DRM.
Most probably it will never be compatible with Wine and even a crack is not an option anymore since all solutions so far just work around the triggers instead of completely removing them.
Therefore, even DirectX 12 support in Wine would be a waste of effort, since pretty much every AAA game is now going to be using DENUVO, as it accomplishes what it's supposed to be doing; at the expense that we on Linux are pretty much screwed if a game using DENUVO is not ported over to Tux natively!
The best example right now is DooM 2016: Wine-Staging already supports Vulkan, so it should easily run on it, as the MultiPlayer Alpha OpenGL version already did.
But even the recently released version by CPY is not able to work, since the already mentioned problem persists; DENUVO can not be fully removed, just worked around, which doesn't help us on Linux at all, because we can not get it to work in the first place...

I'm sorry to say so, but the future for Linux as a gaming platform looks really bleak, dark & grim!