Support NeoGAF

[V_Arnold]

Put me also in the "could not install ubuntu from usb stick" camp, it was VERY frustrating of an experience. That does not mean I hate linux, but it does not like my USB's very much : (

 

[Durante]

To be fair this is more of an explanation of why DX11/9 support will eventually be dropped by AAA console game devs rather than an explanation of why they would support Vulkan.

The key word there is "eventually". See also Fafalada's comment on the length of "transitional periods".

With Vulkan, you don't need a transitional period and still don't lock out any potential customers due to API choice.

 

[Candescence]

Is there any new mechanism that prevents nvidia, amd, google etc from introducing proprietary extensions? I.e. gameworks at api level.
From what I understand old OpenGL became inconsistent quasi hardware specific because of this (and possibly bad management of the core api that required those extensions to compete) and that's what killed it.

Dunno about that, but I'd be surprised if Khronos didn't put their foot down on that, because if they didn't, that'd defeat the point of how Vulkan was designed.

 

[Durante]

Vulkan will fully support extensions.

Extensions are in fact one of the most successful parts of the OpenGL model. The issues only arose due to the combination of extensions with an extremely slow-moving core, lacking validation, and neglect bordering on sabotage by OS vendors.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Not nearly as conveniently, no.

I don't know if you realize this, but the entire paradigm of how you interact with an API differs significantly between Vulkan/DX12 (and current console APIs) and DirectX11 (or worse 9). If you introduce a new feature which depends on (or is merely simpler to implement using) the Vulkan/DX12 paradigm, then also having to support it in your "legacy" branch for DX11/9 is a significant effort.

Conversely, with Vulkan you can have a single API and paradigm target a huge variety of devices -- crucially, all relevant versions of Windows, and not just the one MS wants to push at a given point in time.

I don't know if you realize this, but the Xbox One is using DX11/DX12. So why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their games?

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        DX11/DX12

...less effort and resources needed than this:

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        Vulkan

And while DX12 is limited to Windows 10, this won't be really that much of a problem:

- Multiplatform AAA titles are targeted at a very specific kind of gamer on PC. The kind of gamer who is willing to invest in expensive hardware, and usually is willing to use the latest software.

- Windows 10 is free.

- It will take some time until we get DX12-only titles.

- Microsoft did this before with DirectX.

 

[Vash63]

I don't know if you realize this, but the Xbox One is using DX11/DX12. So why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their games?

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        DX11/DX12

...less effort and resources needed than this:

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        Vulkan

And while DX12 is limited to Windows 10, this won't be really that much of a problem:

- Multiplatform AAA titles are targeted at a very specific kind of gamer on PC. The kind of gamer who is willing to invest in expensive hardware, and usually is willing to use the latest software.

- Windows 10 is free.

- It will take some time until we get DX12-only titles.

- Microsoft did this before with DirectX.

Let me fix that for you.

PS4:       GNM/GNMX (+Vulkan?)
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
Windows 10:        Vulkan/DX11/DX12/GL
Windows 7-8.1:    Vulkan/DX11/GL
Linux/SteamOS:   Vulkan/GL
Android:       Vulkan/GL

Discounting GL and DX11 because they're legacy, the choice looks pretty obvious here. You also can't discount the importance of Android, as many studios will make an engine and use it as many places as possible, such as Unreal, Unity and Frostbite.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Tell me more about those games which need to run on:

PS4
Xbox One
Windows 7-8.1
Windows 10
Linux/SteamOS
Android

Not even Telltale games target all these platforms. And I am talking about AAA games. The only relevant platforms here are PS4, Xbox One and PC.

 

[Crayon]

I don't know if you realize this, but the Xbox One is using DX11/DX12. So why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their games?

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        DX11/DX12

...less effort and resources needed than this:

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        Vulkan

Are you suggesting that writing the xbone version of the game produces both dx 12 and dx11 versions? Durante, the person you were responding to here, just tried to tell you that there is a significant difference between dx11 and 12. Are you understanding that part?

 

[00ich]

Tell me more about those games which need to run on:

PS4
Xbox One
Windows 7-8.1
Windows 10
Linux/SteamOS
Android

Not even Telltale games target all these platforms. And I am talking about AAA games.

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a current game , that is on all these platforms.

 

[Boombox On]

I have no idea why I'm still going with my argument

You're making a really silly point. Why would you write for the Xbox One using both DX11 and DX12? That is only a PC problem.

So if you're talking about the effort to create a game, we're actually comparing

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX12
PC:         DX11/DX12

to

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX12
PC:        Vulkan

And here's the thing; the latter is actually preferable to the former because you're only dealing with low-level in the latter, so the same programming paradigm stretches across all 3 platforms.

 

[00ich]

I don't know if you realize this, but the Xbox One is using DX11/DX12. So why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their games?

A better question is "why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their engine?" Because that way they can switch staff between projects with reduced time to adapt to a new development environment, or shorter: more productivity. The big boys love that

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Are you suggesting that writing the xbone version of the game produces both dx 12 and dx11 versions? Durante, the person you were responding to here, just tried to tell you that there is a significant difference between dx11 and 12. Are you understanding that part?

Do you understand that there are currently no Xbox One games that use DirectX 12?

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a current game , that is on all these platforms.

Games. Plural. Also, this is a 2012 AA game. Devs are usually not interested in making games for all those platforms because it either makes no sense because of the genre of the game, or because there aren't enough people interested.

A better question is "why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their engine?" Because that way they can switch staff between projects with reduced time to adapt to a new development environment, or shorter: more productivity. The big boys love that

The big boys also love good documentation and nice development tools. Which Microsoft does provide. AAA studios are more interested in achieving high productivity for all of their multi-million dollar projects, I don't think they care much about what API they use for their occasional low budget mobile game.

 

[00ich]

Games. Plural. Also, this is a 2012 AA game. Devs are usually not interested in making games for all those platforms because it either makes no sense because of the genre of the game, or because there aren't enough people interested.

OK, not really the same game, but same engine (Glacier 2) and most probably reused assets. Hitman Absolution / Hitman sniper.

The big boys also love good documentation and nice development tools. Which Microsoft does provide.

a) the developer tools most staff (content creators) use are specific to the engine or general content creation tools. "good documentation and nice development tools" actually are a reason to reuse a fully developed engine over and over again. Scaling all these productive tools from AAA to mobile just makes a lot of sense.

b) if you use "Microsoft" because they provide documentation for DirectX: I'd image as an engine developer on PC DirectX specs mean little against Nvidias and AMDs actual implementations. If a official Direct3d feature is just slow or buggy all of Microsofts Docs and specifications won't help. Plus AMD and NVidia provide the debuggers and tools for their hardware. That's different on XB1 of course, where MS is in a position to give useful information and tools because they know the hardware too.

 

[Crayon]

Do you understand that there are currently no Xbox One games that use DirectX 12?

It is your understanding that is in question here and that is due to the following quote:

I don't know if you realize this, but the Xbox One is using DX11/DX12. So why would any AAA multiplatform developer use Vulkan for their games?

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        DX11/DX12

...less effort and resources needed than this:

PS4:       GNM/GNMX
Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        Vulkan

This part i particular

Xbox One:  DX11/DX12
PC:        DX11/DX12

You don't seem to get that supporting a dx11 and dx12 version is two different tasks.

 

[FrozenCell]

- Windows 10 is free.

nope, it currently retails for 100 € in my country

that's 100 € to slap an office OS under my TV

100 € less to spend on Linux games

I don't see the value

 

[Mr Swine]

Is Vulcan a offshoot of Mantle or did I dream that up?

 

[FyreWulff]

Is Vulcan a offshoot of Mantle or did I dream that up?

Vulkan is the standardized version of Mantle

 

[Nzyme32]

Vulkan is the standardized version of Mantle

In a way sure. As far as I am aware, Mantle was used as a base for so they could get the ball rolling with Vulkan. Khronos have kept what they liked and built new stuff around it. Saying it is the standardised version of Mantle isn't quite accurate.

 

[alexandros]

Vulkan is extremely important for the industry as a whole, I really hope it gains traction.

 

[Arkanius]

In a way sure. As far as I am aware, Mantle was used as a base for so they could get the ball rolling with Vulkan. Khronos have kept what they liked and built new stuff around it. Saying it is the standardised version of Mantle isn't quite accurate.

It seems every API call was basically a rename of the mantle_CallName to VK_CallName

Sure it was probably expanded, but Mantle was a huge driver of it.

 

[alexandros]

AMD deserves a lot of praise. Mantle really got the ball rolling for new APIs.

 

[tuxfool]

It seems every API call was basically a rename of the mantle_CallName to VK_CallName

Sure it was probably expanded, but Mantle was a huge driver of it.

They completely replaced HLSL IL in favour of SPIR-V. This isn't a minor change.

 

[LaronX]

I really hope this catches on. Thst could finally mean an end to PC gaming = Windows. Which wasn't an issue until they kept pulling more and more crap and taking away control from the end User.

I am pretty sure one of the things that keeps many gamers on Windows is the lack of support on Linux. But if Vulkan changes that I could see that change very very fast. Especially with valve pushing for it.

 

[TheHellsLord]

I'm actually pretty sure that the majority of games will still stick with DX9-11 and/or OpenGL for the forseeable future. DX12 and Vulkan with their higher flexibility also make them quite a bit harder to work with. Smaller developers often haven't even gotten into using more advanced features than what DX9 offered.

I'm also pretty certain that we won't see a clear decission towards Vulkan (but possibly one against it). Some developers of course will root for Vulkan and Linux (they always have with OpenGL) but DX and Windows (as has been mentioned time and time again) have other components aside from graphics that are supported and are helpful.

And then there is of course quite a market of other gaming related peripherals that work on Windows and not on Linux - at least not with more advanced features (keyboards, mice, headsets, etc.) So even if graphics goes through Vulkan - it's not certain that it will help Linux in a big way.

 

[purdobol]

What's weird is that people go out of their way to defend monopolist on PC platform.
And when good alternative is being developed with support from major players in the industry to fix this problem. Those people will try to bash it to death. What is it? Blind MS fanboyism?

Shouldn't we as gamers be happy about this?

 

[Crayon]

What's weird is that people go out of their way to defend monopolist on PC platform.
And when good alternative is being developed with support from major players in the industry to fix this problem. Those people will try to bash it to death. What is it? Blind MS fanboyism?

Shouldn't we as gamers be happy about this?

It may be weird, but its a prevelant attitude. Probably to do with the perceived aspect of responsible consumption or activism that makes "gamers" uncomfortable.

 

[M3d10n]

AMD deserves a lot of praise. Mantle really got the ball rolling for new APIs.

Yep, all three (Metal, DX12, Vulkan) are based on the foundation laid by Mantle.

I'm actually pretty sure that the majority of games will still stick with DX9-11 and/or OpenGL for the forseeable future. DX12 and Vulkan with their higher flexibility also make them quite a bit harder to work with. Smaller developers often haven't even gotten into using more advanced features than what DX9 offered.

I'm also pretty certain that we won't see a clear decission towards Vulkan (but possibly one against it). Some developers of course will root for Vulkan and Linux (they always have with OpenGL) but DX and Windows (as has been mentioned time and time again) have other components aside from graphics that are supported and are helpful.

And then there is of course quite a market of other gaming related peripherals that work on Windows and not on Linux - at least not with more advanced features (keyboards, mice, headsets, etc.) So even if graphics goes through Vulkan - it's not certain that it will help Linux in a big way.

Neither DX12 nor Vulkan (I guess) are more aimed at engine/middleware developers than small developers. They take away a lot of the babysitting that was done by both the driver and API and put the responsibility into the developers hands. But nearly everyone not in the AAA business uses game engines nowadays.

What's weird is that people go out of their way to defend monopolist on PC platform.
And when good alternative is being developed with support from major players in the industry to fix this problem. Those people will try to bash it to death. What is it? Blind MS fanboyism?

Shouldn't we as gamers be happy about this?

The same way we have console games who "hate" PC gaming. They find console gaming simpler and more suited to them and have this idea that PC gaming might take away resources from consoles and force them into dealing with something that they find more complicated. The same logic applies to someone who's used to Windows and thinks Linux can come and "kill" Windows, forcing them to learn a whole new OS they find more complicated.

 

[Dolor]

Vulkan is extremely important for the industry as a whole, I really hope it gains traction.

Agree.

 

[Diffense]

Vulkan is extremely important for the industry as a whole, I really hope it gains traction.

I'd bet on it since it's getting major engine support and support from hardware manufacturers. For them, Vulkan means much simpler drivers and for engine developers it means easier cross-platform graphics support with an api in a style similar to DX12.

Yes, the public release is delayed but Khronos is not a company creating a proprietary solution in a lab before trying to get everyone to use it. Google, Valve, AMD, Intel, NVidia and others had input and are already part of the effort to get Vulkan 1.0 out.

 

[Vash63]

Tell me more about those games which need to run on:

PS4
Xbox One
Windows 7-8.1
Windows 10
Linux/SteamOS
Android

Not even Telltale games target all these platforms. And I am talking about AAA games. The only relevant platforms here are PS4, Xbox One and PC.

Unreal engine. Unity engine. Frostbite engine. Once the engine supports the API, the game developer builds for the engine and can decide which paths to use later - and with all platforms supporting Vulkan that is the most likely target for optimization and support.

And yes, Epic, Unity and DICE are all listed as Vulkan supporters and have already been developing and assisting with it. And ignoring mobile support, Source 2 is also free and primarily Vulkan going forward.

 

[Crayon]

Vulkan will fully support extensions.

Extensions are in fact one of the most successful parts of the OpenGL model. The issues only arose due to the combination of extensions with an extremely slow-moving core, lacking validation, and neglect bordering on sabotage by OS vendors.

I believe there would be some key differences between the current vulkan situation and the GL situation. Organizational differences that could help vulkan avoid GL's pitfalls as outlined in the above quote. Anyone have two cents to throw on that?

edit: to be clear, i'm asking because I have no clue.

 

[tiredheadcrab]

I dont see Vulkan growing support over DX12 in the AAA space. I figure Apple doesnt support it as Metal is their own thing. I actually can see them adopting Vulkan but it will probably be modified for their own ecosystem and wont be what the creators intended for. So that leaves Android, Linux and Windows. Android will adopt it but there was a rumor that google is looking to make their own custom chips like Apple does and i can imagine they will form their own api for its developers. Google really needs to get on android developers as right now its apps quality lags behind Apple. Linux will take what it can get and so will Linux gamers which is incredibly niche. I am thinking AAA developers will be happy using DX going forward for a long time.

 

[LordOfChaos]

They left the group in favour of their own Metal API, and pretty much all references to their involvement in Vulkan are gone since Metal was announced for Mac, so most likely not

Do you have a source for this actually? I know it's repeated a lot and I think it's true, but someone's asking for a source and I don't see where the latest membership of the group is. Or an article pointing to them leaving.

 

[Nzyme32]

I dont see Vulkan growing support over DX12 in the AAA space. I figure Apple doesnt support it as Metal is their own thing. I actually can see them adopting Vulkan but it will probably be modified for their own ecosystem and wont be what the creators intended for. So that leaves Android, Linux and Windows. Android will adopt it but there was a rumor that google is looking to make their own custom chips like Apple does and i can imagine they will form their own api for its developers. Google really needs to get on android developers as right now its apps quality lags behind Apple. Linux will take what it can get and so will Linux gamers which is incredibly niche. I am thinking AAA developers will be happy using DX going forward for a long time.

I wouldn't be so sure on that. If there is some console adoption of Vulkan as an option as well, which has been suggested, it makes a lot more sense to do so for multiplatform titles.

Do you have a source for this actually? I know it's repeated a lot and I think it's true, but someone's asking for a source and I don't see where the latest membership of the group is. Or an article pointing to them leaving.

Just a comparison of the original Siggraph talk when it was OGLnext, and the GDC talk revealing Vulkan, both feature Apple as part of the supported platforms in the slides and talk; fast forward to the recent showings post-metal on OSX, all references have been removed and the talks do not mention apple at all. Same with the LunarG info

 

[tiredheadcrab]

I wouldn't be so sure on that. If there is some console adoption of Vulkan as an option as well, which has been suggested, it makes a lot more sense to do so for multiplatform titles.



Just a comparison of the original Siggraph talk when it was OGLnext, and the GDC talk revealing Vulkan, both feature Apple as part of the supported platforms in the slides and talk; fast forward to the recent showings post-metal on OSX, all references have been removed and the talks do not mention apple at all. Same with the LunarG info

So Nintendo will adopt it for the NX. How many 3rd parties will adopt it then? Probably the same amount now. So that means that Sony would adopt it for PS5 maybe? Okay but MS will stick to DX12 for the next gen xbox and the PC. Even then Vulkan will probably be different from what the creators intended when Sony gets their hands on it anyway for their own ecosystem.

I was looking at Valves push for SteamOS/Linux being optimistic about it as there are Linux gamers out there. But the more i see it Valve was reacting to Windows 8 and what they saw in what could be Windows 9. It was, as another user stated above, an idealist move and not one grounded in any real value.

I think Vulkan will be good for platform holders but what platform holders choose to do with it could be very different from what they intend. Its Open Source dont forget.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

I don't think that Sony will adopt Vulkan. I mean why should they? The advantages of Vulkan like cross platform support don't matter to them, they only care about the PS4.

Nintendo could support Vulkan, but it will be either because they aren't willing/capable of creating their own thing, or they fear that less people would support the NX. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they won't support Vulkan at all. They don't really care much about what's happening in the industry. And Nintendo doesn't really matter when it comes to AAA multiplatform titles, and I think they know that.

It is your understanding that is in question here and that is due to the following quote:
This part i particular
You don't seem to get that supporting a dx11 and dx12 version is two different tasks.

I have no idea how you got to this "conclusion".

What's weird is that people go out of their way to defend monopolist on PC platform.
And when good alternative is being developed with support from major players in the industry to fix this problem. Those people will try to bash it to death. What is it? Blind MS fanboyism?

Shouldn't we as gamers be happy about this?

Jesus. You think I am "defending Microsoft"? I am merely describing the reality. I am explaining how the industry will decide. I am not defending anyone.

But what you guys here are doing is just wishful thinking. You list arguments that you think are important, but when I explain to you that these aren't important to the industry, you are getting angry. I am sorry, but that's not my fault.

Again: The Xbox One is using DirectX. And it will continue to do so. That's why multiplatform titles will be using DirectX on PC. Period. And it doesn't matter that DX11 and DX12 are different. They will support both for a transitional period. They have to learn a new API anyway. One of the first major games that will do this is Deux Ex: Mankind Divided, which will support DX11 and DX12. Then there will be select EA titles which will also support DX11 and DX12. Just look at this tweet:

Even DICE likes DX12. Vulkan is not bad. But it's simply not needed in the AAA space when you have DX12, and it also doesn't help that it's too late. DX12 has been a reality for quite some time.

Unreal engine. Unity engine. Frostbite engine. Once the engine supports the API, the game developer builds for the engine and can decide which paths to use later - and with all platforms supporting Vulkan that is the most likely target for optimization and support.

1. Vulkan is not on all platforms.

2. You are making the mistake in thinking "number of supported platforms" > "importance of platform". They won't focus their optimization efforts on Vulkan just because it does also support mobile and Linux platforms.

 

[Nzyme32]

Even DICE likes DX12. Vulkan is not bad. But it's simply not needed in the AAA space when you have DX12, and it also doesn't help that it's too late. DX12 has been a reality for quite some time.

Misleading - he mentions the same for Vulkan in the tweet conversation

So Nintendo will adopt it for the NX. How many 3rd parties will adopt it then? Probably the same amount now. So that means that Sony would adopt it for PS5 maybe? Okay but MS will stick to DX12 for the next gen xbox and the PC. Even then Vulkan will probably be different from what the creators intended when Sony gets their hands on it anyway for their own ecosystem.

I was looking at Valves push for SteamOS/Linux being optimistic about it as there are Linux gamers out there. But the more i see it Valve was reacting to Windows 8 and what they saw in what could be Windows 9. It was, as another user stated above, an idealist move and not one grounded in any real value.

I think Vulkan will be good for platform holders but what platform holders choose to do with it could be very different from what they intend. Its Open Source dont forget.

Silly argument.

Mantle was restricted to AMD hardware, so there was practically no purpose for others to get involved. The intention to open it up fully was what lit a fire under the ass of MS to produce DX12, AMD later ended support of Mantle and let Khronos have unfettered access to mantle to use it as a starting point.

Why the focus on NX? There is no indication of that alone or at all. All that was said regarding consoles was a very coy "outlook good". Implementing additional solutions is not an issue either for multiple platforms, particularly to aid 3rd parties

 

[Gemüsepizza]

My point was that they don't view this whole discussion through the eyes of idealists. They care about performance and cost, they are strongly considering DirectX, because it will be the future on the Xbox One, and this is one of their 3 main platforms. By supporting DX12 on PC, 2 of their main platforms will use the same API. There is no need to use another API for PC when it doesn't run better. He also did say something about the Win 10 requirement for DX12:

https://twitter.com/repi/status/585559153000742913

 

[Boombox On]

Android will adopt it but there was a rumor that google is looking to make their own custom chips like Apple does and i can imagine they will form their own api for its developers.

Google's business model (horizontal integration) benefits and coincide with the desire for open software standards. It's why their web rendering engine is open source, their desktop is based on the web and a Linux kernel, and their phone OS is based on Java. There's little reason to expect a company that is so based on openness, that publicly contributed and supported a brand new standard... not use it in the immediate future.

Plus, the rumor was that Google would help design chips with other manufacturers to bring uniformity and defragmentation to the android hardware ecosystem (whereas your prediction would do the exact opposite). That's not making their own chips. You wouldn't call your competitors and say "Hey, we're here to compete with you. Can you help us?"

By supporting DX12 on PC, 2 of their main platforms will use the same API. There is no need to use another API for PC when it doesn't run better.

For the 18th time, market share. DX11's reach is about 9 times bigger than DX12's (and Vulkan's reach, even on Windows alone, has the potential to be even bigger than that).
By the time that shifts enough where DX12-only is something people would want to sell on a large scale, it won't even be the newest version.

 

[dgrdsv]

Unreal engine. Unity engine. Frostbite engine. Once the engine supports the API, the game developer builds for the engine and can decide which paths to use later - and with all platforms supporting Vulkan that is the most likely target for optimization and support.

That's quite a bit of wishful thinking there. Vulkan is supported on Windows and Linux only right now. Consoles won't support it. Apple seems to be in no hurry to support it. So that leaves the only possible addition in form of Android and this doesn't really help much (Android is OpenGL only since it's beginning; didn't do anything to OpenGL on desktops, does it?).

And yes, Epic, Unity and DICE are all listed as Vulkan supporters and have already been developing and assisting with it. And ignoring mobile support, Source 2 is also free and primarily Vulkan going forward.

Unfortunately supporting an API in the engine doesn't mean that every engine licensee will use the API as contrary to a popular believe such support actually require quite a bit of effort on part of the licensee as well as the engine provider. Most commercial engines will probably support Vulkan but that doesn't mean that we'll see a lot of games actually using Vulkan outside of SteamOS ports.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

For the 18th time, market share. DX11's reach is about 9 times bigger than DX12's.

I already explained to you that they will support both DX11 and DX12 for the foreseeable future. You probably won't see DX12 only games in 2016. When this happens, Windows 10 will have a much bigger marketshare than today. Also, they don't care if you have Windows 7 and DX11 on your PC with integrated Intel graphics when they release Battlefield 6. They care about what you have on your Gaming PC. And Windows 10 market share will be even bigger there.

 

[Easy_D]

But there is absolutely no need to waste time and resources on DX11 once Vulkan is out, it would be easier (and cheaper) to support DX12 and Vulkan given that their implementations are much closer than DX11 and 12 are.

With DX12 and Vulkan they can essentially reach everyone

 

[Gemüsepizza]

The time on DX11 is already spent. They don't have to waste time on DX11.

 

[Easy_D]

The time on DX11 is already spent. They don't have to waste time on DX11.

Oh yes. They just have to press the magical "Convert DX12 code to DX11" button.

 

[Nzyme32]

The time on DX11 is already spent. They don't have to waste time on DX11.

I think at this point it will just be amusing to use this thread in a couple of years and see what has happened in that time. Subbed

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Oh yes. They just have to press the magical "Convert DX12 code to DX11" button.

They won't do DX12 games and then convert them to DX11. They will do DX11 games and then convert them to DX12. Replacing DX11 with Vulkan is not an option because one is an established, mature API, and the other one is an API which specs only have been finalized, there aren't even drivers out there yet for god's sake.

I think at this point it will just be amusing to use this thread in a couple of years and see what has happened in that time. Subbed

It really will be.

 

[Nzyme32]

They won't do DX12 games and then convert them to DX11. They will do DX11 games and then convert them to DX12. Replacing DX11 with Vulkan is not an option because one is an established, mature API, and the other one is an API which specs only have been finalized, there aren't even drivers out there yet for god's sake.



It really will be.

Still missing the point on both counts. More amusing.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Just say it if you don't have any more arguments. It's ok.

 

[Easy_D]

What do you think happens when developers port a console title to PC?

Edit: Well that explains it. Absolutely nothing.

 

[Boombox On]

I already explained to you that they will support both DX11 and DX12 for the foreseeable future.

So they will be supporting 2 APIs then. Gotta be consistent with your claims.

You probably won't see DX12 only games in 2016. When this happens, Windows 10 will have a much bigger marketshare than today.

And Windows 7+8 together will probably still be huge, as W7's marketshare has dropped less than 5% in the last 3 years (the lifespan of Windows 8) and Windows 10 is only free for a year. Even if Windows 10 were to make some miraculous growth over Windows 7, DX12 will be out of date by that time, even in the most extremely optimistic scenarios.

Meanwhile, Vulkan.

Also, they don't care if you have Windows 7 and DX11 on your PC with integrated Intel graphics when they release Battlefield 6.

They probably will, as

1) That is a large group of people
2) Integrated graphics get a huge boost from low-level languages
3) and the relevance of integrated graphics is going to increase overtime, not decrease