Carmack gives the middle finger to DX10

[mpjesse]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40199

I think he's making a mistake. He should at least consider it... don't ya think?

 

[sailer]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40199

I think he's making a mistake. He should at least consider it... don't ya think?

He could be making a mistake, or he could be the leader of a trend away from DX. I remember that years ago, Glide was a favored format until it got abandonded for DX. It could be that M$ has overstepped itself and will end up driving people away and into the waiting arms of Linux and OpenGL. It will be interesting to watch what happens over the next year or two.

 

[titan_tgforumz]

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40199

I think he's making a mistake. He should at least consider it... don't ya think?

He obviously did consider it.

Fanbois are too quick to religiously align themselves with things they don't understand.

Direct3D 9, 10, and OpenGL are just APIs. OpenGL happens to have a lower CPU overhead than d3d9 and additional opportunities for the driver to internally be multithreaded. But it only ever manifested itself as a minor advantage for Doom3's beautiful engine over Unreal's, HL2's, or Farcry's.

Now d3d10 is out which is better than 9, and people only understand "better", not how much better. 99.999 is indeed < 100, but its small enough you won't care most of the time.

OpenGL is good and most importantly all the d3d10 specific features can be used in it. In Windows XP! Why force your fans to upgrade to DRM infected Vista to be able to use all the features of the hardware they already paid for? Sounds like JC is doing the noble thing here by providing d3d10 level graphics in Windows XP.

 

[killer_roach]

Carmack's always been an OpenGL developer; what's new, really, is that he's considering making a DX10 game. That is what the real news is, as per the Inq's headline. I'm surprised that there would be that much of a pull, considering that Carmack has been designing OpenGL-based 3D engines for a decade now... he's become one of the "old hands" of game design, but the real question now is whether or not he is able to remain relevant in the modern era of gaming. After all, the competition around him has become more voracious than ever...

And Titan: "DRM infested"? The only DRM in Vista was stuff that was foisted upon Microsoft... and the operating systems without those systems will not be able to do certain things (like play back HD video) once those regimes come into play, like it or not.

 

[Heyyou27]

I personally would enjoy seeing OpenGL based games still coming to the market.

 

[mpjesse]

Well thanks for lumping me in with the fan boys. Just because I think he's making a mistake by not seriously considering DX10 doesn't mean i'm a DX fan boy. I agree w/ everything he has to say regarding OpenGL. All around OpenGL is better... esp. in terms of performance. DX is horrid when it comes to frame rates (probably because it's not as efficient or simple as OpenGL)

The point I'm making is more and more developers are dropping OpenGL for DX. It seems to me the only remaining major developer is id. Furthermore, engine licensing isn't what it used to be. Most developers are going to their own proprietary engines because writing a game engine around DX is reportedly easier than OpenGL.

And yeah... what's w/ the DRM infested comment on Vista? Sure it incorporates some new stuff, but I've not had a SINGLE problem playing ALL types of media on my system w/ Vista. MKV files, mp3, lossless, etc. And most my shite is pirated. Furthermore I'm able to rip, burn, modify just as easily with Vista as I was w/ XP. To sum it up, I've not run into a single DRM roadblock w/ Vista. And besides, with companies moving to DRM free music and (eventually) movies it's a moot issue.

 

[slyck]

"The only DRM in Vista was stuff that was foisted upon Microsoft"

Uh huh. As if MS didn't have a choice. Being they have a monopoly they do as they please, and infesting Vista with DRM is what they chose.

 

[nhobo]

DX10 is just another monopoly ploy by M$.

 

[killer_roach]

"The only DRM in Vista was stuff that was foisted upon Microsoft"

Uh huh. As if MS didn't have a choice. Being they have a monopoly they do as they please, and infesting Vista with DRM is what they chose.

They did have a choice: Put HDCP in Vista so that you can play protected media once HD-DVD and Blu-Ray vendors implement ICT, or don't and leave consumers with a downgraded image. Microsoft isn't a monopoly player in consumer electronics, and the AACS LA wouldn't care if Microsoft wasn't on board; it wouldn't affect anyone's plans. And support for the Trusted Platform Module was already in XP, so even your precious six-year-old OS has DRM in it (although not active if your motherboard lacks that chip).

nhobo: Sure. Just like DX9 was a monopoly ploy by MS as well. No matter what, Windows is a monopoly in terms of its market. The only difference is that, to use DX10 features, you have to get Vista. That being said, with purchasing all the hardware needed to be able to run DX10 games properly, it's basically a whole new system. The only difference is that MS thinks you should buy a new OS when you get a completely new system (and, if you bought the system from an OEM, it has it already). Granted, I had a free copy of Vista, so the argument doesn't matter so much to me, but Vista is more of a worthwhile jump from XP than XP was from 2000...

 

[Heyyou27]

And Titan: "DRM infested"? The only DRM in Vista was stuff that was foisted upon Microsoft... and the operating systems without those systems will not be able to do certain things (like play back HD video) once those regimes come into play, like it or not.

I'm pretty sure you've got that wrong; if Microsoft is pushed around so easily, why can the non-HDCP complaint Xbox360 play back HD-DVD video at 1080p? :?

 

[No1sFanboy]

And Titan: "DRM infested"? The only DRM in Vista was stuff that was foisted upon Microsoft... and the operating systems without those systems will not be able to do certain things (like play back HD video) once those regimes come into play, like it or not.

I'm pretty sure you've got that wrong; if Microsoft is pushed around so easily, why can the non-HDCP complaint Xbox360 play back HD-DVD video at 1080p? :?

It can because it is analog. It is explained here very well.

Today you could buy an HD DVD or Blu-ray drive, put it in your PC, install HD movie playing software, and play a movie at 1080p resolution using your analog VGA output!
No special HDCP compliant hardware is required!

Not in response to Heyyou:
I've heard this whole Vista being DRM plagued thing for some time and finally feel the need to comment. If I were Microsoft with deep pockets et. all I certainly would not want to give the impression that my OS is a piracy tool. How can the OS not support drm? I'm still very limited in my Vista experience but from a DRM standpoint Vista has not been intrusive.

 

[tamalero]

let's not forget that carmack actually wants NVidia to implement directX10 stuff in OpenGL.
so i supose it all depends if nvidia gets these.

 

[mpjesse]

Ummm... i think what Heyyou means is that if M$ wanted to they could have made it impossible for the hd-dvd xbox drive to work on PC's.

But they didn't and hence it shows at least a little bit of willingness to give the finger to DRM proponents.

On a somewhat different topic I think the industry is starting to realize no matter what they do copyrights and copy protection will be broken/defeated. AACS was cracked in record time and the updates to defeat the cracks are usually defeated the next day. I see at least one new bluray or hd-dvd title on the torrent sites every day. They're not full 1080... but they're 720 which is waaay better than 480. Once bandwidth's get higher in the homes pirated 1080 releases are inevitable.

 

[ZOldDude]

Carmack knows what he is doing and untill he himself says he will make DX10 games it is not going to happen.

Nobody needs Vista with it's DRM and sloooooow running of everything and even Microsoft has said it will no longer support Vista at the end of 2008.

It says it all when the OS maker hears from people that they won't buy this crappy product and then themselfs decide to give up on it the 2nd month it was out for sale.

If all you want is to play HD DVD's then buy a stand alone player for them...by the time more than 50% of the movies are HD with DRM the stand alone players will be down to the same price as a normal DVD player.

There is no reason why DX10 sould not be an upgrade for XP and in fact people are already makeing it work.
Search the net.

(fixed some typos)

 

[mpjesse]

Nobody needs Vista with it's DRM and sloooooow running of everything and even Microsoft has said it will no longer support Vista at the end of 2008.

What in the world are you basing that comment on? Microsoft hasn't given up on Vista. I think you're trying to extrapolate something that isn't there. If by "giving up" you mean Microsoft's new strategy to release a new OS every 2 years, you're reading way too much into it. The reason M$ is moving to this strategy is because they lost a shite load of revenue between XP and Vista. Not only that, it's starting to look like the Operating System is because more and more irrelevant with each release. Microsoft knows the web is more important than the OS and is trying to adjust its strategy... thus "major" OS releases are going the way of the dodo. It just makes more sense to "evolve" the OS every 2 years (which is what Apple and linux publishers have been doing for a long time).

Now I do agree that DX10 should have been an upgrade to XP... but oh well.

And if you're calling Vista crappy, you obviously haven't used it for an extended period of time. I've been using it from day 1 and i'm very happy with it. It's not a god send or anything, but it IS better than XP. Sure it has some minor compatibility issues, but what new OS doesn't? The only complaint I had was poor driver support in the beginning for MAJOR products like Linksys wireless cards, but at the end of the day you can't blame that on M$. It's Linksys' fault for not having them ready in time. Anyways, driver support has been cleared up... everyone has Vista drivers now.

 

[titan_tgforumz]

Well thanks for lumping me in with the fan boys. Just because I think he's making a mistake by not seriously considering DX10 doesn't mean i'm a DX fan boy. I agree w/ everything he has to say regarding OpenGL. All around OpenGL is better... esp. in terms of performance. DX is horrid when it comes to frame rates (probably because it's not as efficient or simple as OpenGL)

1) He will be using DirectX 10.
2) He did seriously consider Direct3D 10, but it wasn't compelling.
3) DX is not horrid when it comes to frame rates or anything else.

The point I'm making is more and more developers are dropping OpenGL for DX.

Name two in the last two years. Since Direct3D 8 nobody other than id and licensees have used OpenGL.

Homeworld 2, Serious Sam 1, Tribes 2 were the last games I can remember that used OpenGL independent of id.

Furthermore, engine licensing isn't what it used to be. Most developers are going to their own proprietary engines because writing a game engine around DX is reportedly easier than OpenGL.

Opposite of the truth. Engine licensing is getting bigger and bigger every year and expanding into consoles. Exceptions are companies like Valve with a bunch of money that want to get into the licensing business themselves.

 

[mpjesse]

Well thanks for lumping me in with the fan boys. Just because I think he's making a mistake by not seriously considering DX10 doesn't mean i'm a DX fan boy. I agree w/ everything he has to say regarding OpenGL. All around OpenGL is better... esp. in terms of performance. DX is horrid when it comes to frame rates (probably because it's not as efficient or simple as OpenGL)

1) He will be using DirectX 10.
2) He did seriously consider Direct3D 10, but it wasn't compelling.
3) DX is not horrid when it comes to frame rates or anything else.

The point I'm making is more and more developers are dropping OpenGL for DX.

Name two in the last two years. Since Direct3D 8 nobody other than id and licensees have used OpenGL.

Homeworld 2, Serious Sam 1, Tribes 2 were the last games I can remember that used OpenGL independent of id.

Furthermore, engine licensing isn't what it used to be. Most developers are going to their own proprietary engines because writing a game engine around DX is reportedly easier than OpenGL.

Opposite of the truth. Engine licensing is getting bigger and bigger every year and expanding into consoles. Exceptions are companies like Valve with a bunch of money that want to get into the licensing business themselves.

how many games did the doom3 engine license?

how many games did the HL2 engine license?

how many games did the crysis engine license?

now, let's go back a few years. how many did games did the quake titles license? and Unreal?

hmmm...

i'm refering to PC gaming here.

 

[vonhell]

if I remember well, the next Carmack's might be his last, at least that is what he said before Doom 3 in some interview back then he mentioned, that he is thinking about quitting the business after the Doom3 + one engine technology and focus on personal life / his space project (Armadillo). of course, that might have chenaged but it is the next paragraph that makes me call this INQ BS

other thing is that Carmack was always OpenGL man and I see no way in hell that he would abandon it. as someone mentioned - DirectX (or Direct3D to be specific) is just an API and there is no reason not to add SM4.0 capabilities to OpenGL as well. sure, DX is an interesting and comfy API (I program in D3D9 myself) but if he's been doing OpenGL for 10 years, why would he swtch now if he plans on retiring soon ?

 

[enewmen]

I personally would enjoy seeing OpenGL based games still coming to the market.

OpenGL never left.
I also think DX10 is the LAST API with shaders.
Anyway, here is an idea. The Future is here.

 

[ZOldDude]

If by "giving up" you mean Microsoft's new strategy to release a new OS every 2 years, you're reading way too much into

After the 2nd month of Vista sales and it selling LESS than "old" XP along with complaints and global shity reviews.... the "New Strategy" to state it will not support it at the end of 2008 seems about right.

Only people who did not know better bought it and a vast amount comlained.
People in general don't want the crap and they (Microsoft) are moving on to anything that -will- sale and leaving behind a long history of many years of OS support.

Microsoft even gave the OEM's more XP time.

The world is not wrong when it screams Vista sucks.
It is fated for a much shorter life than ME.

 

[vonhell]

I personally would enjoy seeing OpenGL based games still coming to the market.

OpenGL never left.
I also think DX10 is the LAST API with shaders.
Anyway, here is an idea. The Future is here.

well, I don't agree, at least partially. sure, raytracing is a nice and pretty convenient way to render scenes, but it's not as beautiful as it looks. the problem with ray tracing is collision detection and the more objects you have on the screen - the more time ray tracing takes. and while I can easily imagine doom3 done using ray tracing (if it hadn't been done already...) I see no way that we will see ray-traced version of something similiar to medieval 2 or crysis in many years to come. they just render way too many objects on the screen

and yeah, Vista sucks. has anyone noticed that it took 6 years from win 95 to win XP and 6 years for Vista to arrive ? now compare XP to 95 and Vista to XP

 

[ZOldDude]

and yeah, Vista sucks. has anyone noticed that it took 6 years from win 95 to win XP and 6 years for Vista to arrive ? now compare XP to 95 and Vista to XP

You forgot about Microsofts OTHER failed OS...ME.

 

[vonhell]

and yeah, Vista sucks. has anyone noticed that it took 6 years from win 95 to win XP and 6 years for Vista to arrive ? now compare XP to 95 and Vista to XP

You forgot about Microsofts OTHER failed OS...ME.

I did not forget, I was merciful

I used 95/XP/Vista just as an example what can be done in a specific (6 years) timeframe

 

[ZOldDude]

and yeah, Vista sucks. has anyone noticed that it took 6 years from win 95 to win XP and 6 years for Vista to arrive ? now compare XP to 95 and Vista to XP

You forgot about Microsofts OTHER failed OS...ME.

I did not forget, I was merciful

I used 95/XP/Vista just as an example what can be done in a specific (6 years) timeframe

If they removed all the lame DRM "provider encyption protection" it may be a good OS.
It would sure be alot faster than it is.

 

[PGHammer]

Oh, please. Carmack is an OpenGL programmer. To expect him to completely change over is VERY much expecting a leopard to literally change his spots. A major reason for his hostility to DX is the *sameness* of the APIs that DX calls are made to, and the inability to write specific calls to take advantage of proprietary features (while OpenGL allows this, DX does not). DX 10 is even harsher (from a programming standpoint) on variations from expected API calls than even DX 9; on top of that, DX 10 requires a commitment to Windows Vista. While Carmack has been a programmer far longer than I have, the sheer fact that he *has* been programming almost entirely in a single API would make him all the more reluctant (and resistant) to change (I specifically remember changing from dBase to SQL, sliding through InterBase along the way; while I used mostly Borland's API and programming tools, I certainly didn't wind up there! I actually wound up with using a Microsoft front-end, Visual Studio to be precise, with a variety of back ends: Borland's own InterBase, Microsoft SQL Server, or even Sybase SQL Server.). Would Carmack even consider such an approach?