126 réponses à ce sujet

[Lumikki]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Does Unreal 2 support DX11? That's going to be the determining factor. Graphics are only as good as the engine that runs them, and if Unreal 2 can't do it, then it won't be a feature of ME3.

What unreal 2 has to do with Mass Effect serie?

Mass Effect serie has been using from start Unreal engine 3 and Yes unreal engine 3 does support DX11.

http://gamingbolt.co...unreal-3-engine
http://en.wikipedia....i/Unreal_Engine
http://www.unrealengine.com/platforms

[True Zarken]

Any sign of PC support is good in my books. I agree with Icinix they should really sort out Dynamic lighting and cinematic lighting.

A bit of eyefinity support couldn't hurt either you know. =P

[Ylhaym]

mrcrusty wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Gimmick.

High Res Textures > DX 11.

Obviously I don't think so. I want kick ass games. Graphics to me are just as important as story and gameplay. The cheap and crappy console ports are not what I am waiting for. So keep doing the PC fans a favor and push for the lowest denominator.

DX 11 is pointless unless it's built like that from the ground up.

Most games are built on DX 9 or some other outdated API to cater for consoles, then upscale a few effects like tesselation for PC on DX 11. Leading to massively taxing games that don't noticeably look better than their DX 9 counterparts.

The great benefit of DX 11 is in it's efficiency improvements and support for multithreading and parallel processing. Which are almost always made moot if not designed to take advantage of them properly.

Tesselation is a gimmick, DoF is not DX 11, neither is AA or high res textures.

Remember Witcher 2 was made on DX 9 and Dragon Age 2 has DX 11. Run both on max and tell me which game looks better.

But when Battlefield 3 comes out, I think we'll see some progress in this area.

Pretty much this...


Implementation of DX11 on DX9 based game is (almost) gimmick... A DX11 game built from ground up that utilize all DX11 features and improvement, that's what i want... I remember my graphic nerdgasm when i saw BF3 on E3... Then i heard about the Crysis 2 DX11 patch... I thought i'll upgrade to a DX11 card when its released. I saw the trailer, and decided to wait for BF3 for an upgrade.

edit: added this part

True Zarken wrote...

Any sign of PC support is good in my books. I agree with Icinix they should really sort out Dynamic lighting and cinematic lighting. 

THAT will really change our Mass Effect Experience!  

Modifié par Ylhaym, 06 juillet 2011 - 10:29 .

[mesmerizedish]

FERMi27 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Does Unreal 2 support DX11? That's going to be the determining factor. Graphics are only as good as the engine that runs them, and if Unreal 2 can't do it, then it won't be a feature of ME3.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Effect_2 wrote...

Engine   Unreal Engine 3, Mass Effect 3 engine (PS3)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_Engine wrote...

The third generation of the Unreal Engine (UE3) is designed for DirectX (versions 9-11 for Windows and Xbox 360)

You're right. ME is Unreal 3, not Unreal 2. My mistake

[Potax1]

I support too. Maybe, from my point of view, high res textures are more important than dx11, but still it will be nice to have both things, and ofc. antialiasing.

[Vertigo_1]

I support it but It won't happen.
Why?
Because the version of the Engine in use for ME3 doesn't support DX11:

http://twitter.com/#...359093570412544
"Hey I wonder if you can tell us which version of the Unreal Engine you will be using for ME3?"

"March 2010 code drop the rest is custom-built."

March 2011 version of UDK supports DX11.

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 07 juillet 2011 - 01:17 .

[Lumikki]

Yeah, but you assume that they don't update they engine in this year at all? But use more than year old version while there is still over half year to release day?

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juillet 2011 - 01:22 .

[Vertigo_1]

Lumikki wrote...

Yeah, but you assume that they don't update they engine in this year at all? But use more than year old version while there is still over half year to release day?

I'm not assuming...I was told this is the code they would be using...
They are using March 2010 code but it's also heavily modified to their liking (bolded for emphasis)

In order to update they would have to GET the March 2011 engine release and then update everything, make sure it works, etc.
Updating their assets to a newer engine (and having to get their modified code working too btw would take a long time.  Right now their priority is to get levels approved and get content into the game and make sure it's working.

Updating the engine this late isn't going to happen.

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 07 juillet 2011 - 01:35 .

[Zhijn]

I'd be happy with just some keyboard shortcuts for journals, character sreen and what not. xD

But yeah DX11 would be a sweet change to ME. And since i got myself a new pc and having just finished TW2 on max let me just say what a wonderful treat it was on eyes, and mind. =)

[Marn_Cherone]

DX11 would be so awsome...
ME3 not having it, would be very poor. By now it should be clear, that people want that, even if they bring it through a patch later on (see crysis 2, DA2, Shogun total war 2)

Modifié par Marn_Cherone, 07 juillet 2011 - 03:27 .

[Gterror]

If only Bioware could use a Frostbite 2 engine on Mass Effect games then it would be so awesome.
Back to topic,DX11 is a must for ME3 as a optional patch for those who can support DX11.

[Epic Legion]

Bioware uses modified old revision of UE3, so no.

[Art3m]

Hell, it's a game they aremaking not a movie. They are still better then many of other developpers. With or without DX11 the game will be the best in 2012

[Lumikki]

Vertigo_1 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Yeah, but you assume that they don't update they engine in this year at all? But use more than year old version while there is still over half year to release day?

I'm not assuming...I was told this is the code they would be using...

Like I sayed before you are assuming.

No I don't mean you are assumming what they sayed to you as what they use, but you are assuming that they don't upgrade the engine later. Did Bioware say to you that they don't update they engine?

Point been that even how good your assumption is, it's still just your assumption.

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juillet 2011 - 05:25 .

[Hathur]

Guys, DX11 support for Unreal Engine 3 / 3.5 was only implemented into the core engine this year (just a few months back).

I'm not sure how much you understand about software engineering, but you don't (in terms of cost & time efficiency) go back to re-implement drastic new engine features when a game is already 1/2 to 2/3 through it's development cycle.

In order for ME3 to have implemented the Unreal Engine 3 DX11 support, the UE3 DX11 engine changes would have had to have been released some 1.5 years ago by Epic.. right about when Bioware first started work on ME3... but the UE3 engine improvements were only completed by Epic a few months back... there was / is no time to implement these features into a game already so far in it's development cycle, it would delay release a good year if not more (and they sure as hell aren't taking a financial hit like that just to support a feature a minor percentage of PC gamers will fully utilize anyway).

You won't see DX11 features in a UE3 based game until a good 1-2 years from now at best.

Modifié par Hathur, 29 août 2011 - 08:12 .

[Carfax]

Hathur wrote...

You won't see DX11 features in a UE3 based game until a good 1-2 years from now at best.

I had to LOL at this one

Homefront, which used the UE3 had DX11, and Batman Arkham City which uses the exact same engine as ME3 and is due out in a little over a month, has already been announced to support DX11 (a long with PhysX and 3D Vision) and will feature tessellation, soft shadows and high definition ambient occlusion.

Bioware is just a lazy developer nuff said. 

Modifié par Carfax, 29 août 2011 - 08:23 .

[Hathur]

^ They are using singular elements of DX11 support in the UE3 engine only (because one or two or a few scant elements are easier to patch).

But for a UE3 game that fully utilizes DX11 features, that's only going to be seen a year at best from now (since most games take 1-2 years these days to produce).

Arkham City is only utilizing a few DX 11 features... and homefront's use of DX11 is eye-roll worthy... it was BARELY utilized whatsoever (to be fair they were using a very early version of the UE3 DX11 implementation before the Unreal engine changes were fully finished, so they only had a few options to work with).

Again, I can't fault Bioware for not bothering to implement DX11. We PC gamers are a miniscule market compared to the consoles... and the percentage of people who do buy the PC version of a game rather than console, often don't have the GPU & CPU capable of handling DX11 features since they're often considerably more demanding on hardware resources.

I happen to be one of the miniscule percentage of PC gamers who have a decent rig capable of handling DX11 features comfortably.... and I realistically don't expect gaming companies to cater to me since the majority of their income is coming from console sales... spending additional development time on enhanced PC visuals would not really net Bioware any meaningful additional profits, because nobody is going to say:

"What? ME3 doesn't support DX11 on PC? Pfft, screw that game, I ain't buying it."

Face it. We're stuck with DX9 mostly until a new console generation is released that is capable of handling DX10 and 11 features... as until that day comes out, devs don't care about really catering to PC gamers (and this is entirely understandable.. games today costs 10's of millions of dollars.. the PC market sure as hell won't net them the profits needed to stay afloat.. they're reliant on the console market for most of their revenue).

[Carfax]

Hathur wrote...

Again, I can't fault Bioware for not bothering to implement DX11. We PC gamers are a miniscule market compared to the consoles....

I don't buy this excuse.  The PC gaming market may be much smaller than the console market, but there is something called artistic integrity.  The true artist always does his best when there's work to be done. 

Other developers like Rocksteady for instance, add tons of features to the PC edition of their games like PhysX, 3D vision, DX11 etc....

Why, since we PC gamers are such a miniscule market and not worth the bother?  I'll tell you why.  It's because they take PRIDE IN THEIR WORK!

They want to put forth the best product possible, and it makes no sense to treat the PC version like the console version, since the PC platform has far more capabilities.

Consoles must be boring to develop for, because they're so limited.  You can do so much more with a PC, and truly make a game worth remembering.....and playing.

Can you imagine Mass Effect 3 without the limitations associated with consoles?  It would be a on a different level entirely.

Modifié par Carfax, 29 août 2011 - 08:53 .

[CroGamer002]

^Art has nothing to do with graphics.

Aesthetics are the one that are important.

[Someone With Mass]

Mesina2 wrote...

^Art has nothing to do with graphics.

Aesthetics are the one that are important.

Indeed. 

I don't really care what technical advancements a game has if it's boring to look at and play.

[marstor05]

well i've got a DX11 card and to be honest there is a difference, but its so small it really doesnt justify shelling out big money on a new card. It certainly wont change the gameplay will it?

I ripped my DX11 card out and put my old DX10 card back in and the performace gain was substantial. For it to run well on DX11 you need a really kick arse system and it'll cost.

Not worth it for a £40 game imo.