What DX10 Could Look Like...

2006-08-02 16:50:56

#1

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6524|Daytona Beach, FL

Wait for DX10 video cards... just look at this...

Microsoft Flight Simulator X in its current state (DirectX 9):

https://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/13/0,1425,sz=1&i=133378,00.jpg

Microsoft Flight Simulator X in DirectX10 (Artist's rendering):

https://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/13/0,1425,sz=1&i=133379,00.jpg

According to a senior FSX developer, that second picture is a "realistic" depiction of what kind of visual effects you can expect to see in DX10.. that's absolutely stunning.

2006-08-02 16:51:58

#2

tvmissleman: The Cereal Killer; +201|6674| United States of America

im in shock and awe. i literaly had my jaw dropped

2006-08-02 16:52:35

#3

kessel!: Peruvian Cocaine; +261|6780|Toronto Canada

yep. that and the cry2 engine or whatever will be pure insanity

2006-08-02 16:53:05

#4

farmerfez: o wut?; +78|6546

jesus....wow you see that water??? It's actually REAL!!!!

2006-08-02 16:53:18

#5

>LOD<Dougalachi: Teh_Complainer; +85|6570|An Hour North of Indy

dude...that is some hardcore graphics

2006-08-02 16:54:55

#6

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6524|Daytona Beach, FL

Seriously if DX10 performs like that.. FSX is about six years ahead of its time.. that is if a computer can handle those gfx and still perform at 20 FPS.

2006-08-02 17:04:24

#7

vanmani: Unintentionally Verbose; +26|6607|Australia

The clouds are stupid. That's just a switched skybox, we could do that today easily if you just wanna turn the texture size up a notch. The water is good, and plausible, lotsa guys are working on better water effects and that's not even DX10. The mountains in the distance and the trees on the shore? That's just cranking up detail, presumably their Level of Detail algorithm has a higher threshold than they tend to at current. All that you need for that is bigger, faster pipelines and more video RAM, 'cos again they seem to have bigger textures than they would today.

So yes, that is definitely plausible. Hell, it's plausible on a fairly high end computer of todays market, without DX10. It's just that the software has to be designed to work on the lower end of todays market as well as the higher end, so we haven't seen that level of commitment yet. FarCry Predator was looking pretty hot for a while there with its actual waves, and Crysis is looking better than that screenshot already.

The future approaches!

Edit: Fixed grammar

Last edited by vanmani (2006-08-02 17:05:40)

2006-08-02 17:10:33

#8

uk-anubis-uk: Member; +21|6537

new GPUs for everyone lol

2006-08-02 17:22:51

#9

a fly: Member; +105|6660|The netherlands

USAFDude_1988 wrote:
Wait for DX10 video cards... just look at this...

Microsoft Flight Simulator X in its current state (DirectX 9):
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/uti … 378,00.jpg

Microsoft Flight Simulator X in DirectX10 (Artist's rendering):
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/uti … 379,00.jpg

According to a senior FSX developer, that second picture is a "realistic" depiction of what kind of visual effects you can expect to see in DX10.. that's absolutely stunning.

Nice photoshopping ;-) (joking).

DX10 is holy, im going to sleep with a copy of dx10 under my pillow when its out

2006-08-02 17:28:44

#10

~NSSO~KamiKazi: Member; +3|6508

vanmani wrote:
The clouds are stupid. That's just a switched skybox, we could do that today easily if you just wanna turn the texture size up a notch. The water is good, and plausible, lotsa guys are working on better water effects and that's not even DX10. The mountains in the distance and the trees on the shore? That's just cranking up detail, presumably their Level of Detail algorithm has a higher threshold than they tend to at current. All that you need for that is bigger, faster pipelines and more video RAM, 'cos again they seem to have bigger textures than they would today.

So yes, that is definitely plausible. Hell, it's plausible on a fairly high end computer of todays market, without DX10. It's just that the software has to be designed to work on the lower end of todays market as well as the higher end, so we haven't seen that level of commitment yet. FarCry Predator was looking pretty hot for a while there with its actual waves, and Crysis is looking better than that screenshot already.

The future approaches!

Edit: Fixed grammar

Dude, have you ever programed anything on a computer before??? Adding depth to stuff....especially clouds that are layered and some that are partially translucent is not that easy.... Also, since it's obvious you're not paying that much attention....the light rays have a reflected appearance on the water and the mountains they're shining on. And lets not forget, it's not a stationary thing, the light will move where it's coming down through the clouds as the clouds move just like in real life. I think the trees need to be worked on if anything. Ever look at the way a tree sways on a breezy day? They need to start incorporated that into games, trees and bushes that react to there surroundings, who wouldn't want to carpet bomb a forest in BF2 and have it all catch on fire???

2006-08-02 17:36:41

#11

RichyCizzo: Member; +9|6493|Florida

I saw this in Maximum PC. The graphics indeed do look much better. I love the clouds and how it affects the mountaintop. Damn good if you ask me. I can't wait...too bad my computer can't run it.

2006-08-02 18:43:31

#12

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6524|Daytona Beach, FL

RichyCizzo wrote:
I saw this in Maximum PC. The graphics indeed do look much better. I love the clouds and how it affects the mountaintop. Damn good if you ask me. I can't wait...too bad my computer can't run it.

That picture by itself is amazing... running it at 25 FPS is the hard part. Then at the same time you have to run AI air traffic and the physics and external model of your own aircraft. I hope it works out alright.

2006-08-02 20:51:24

#13

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6732

its gonna be more realistic than real life

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-08-02 20:54:33

#14

BigmacK: Back from the Dead.; +628|6766|Chicago.

I'm awestruck with those screenies. Wow.

*jaw hits keyboard*

2006-08-02 20:56:49

#15

thanks_champ: Member; +19|6538

The water doesn't look anymore real, it's just got more chop. A calm day can produce lake surfaces that look identical to the top image. With that said, the dx10 image certainly does look good.

2006-08-02 20:57:47

#16

sidious1: Member; +15|6557

Guys, hate to break it to ya but it says that its an "artist rendering". It may be 3dStudio Max, Lightwave, Photoshop....who knows. It looks pretty but its not the finished product yet.

2006-08-02 20:59:23

#17

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|6735|California

what it could be my fucking ass

2006-08-02 21:56:19

#18

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6616|132 and Bush

uk-anubis-uk wrote:
new GPUs for everyone lol

7950's in quad sli.. 4 gigs..lol

Thats a drawing.. well how accurate can it be. PS see the trailer in my sig.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-02 21:56:59)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-02 22:00:44

#19

Maj.Do: Member; +85|6767|good old CA

7950s are DX9 cards : \
also yea ive seen that trailer before, the game does seem nice but i havent seen a ingame video yet : (
but hey it uses the Unreal 3 engine which is Directx 9 and 10 i think so it definately has to look good

Last edited by Maj.Do (2006-08-02 22:10:00)

2006-08-02 22:14:19

#20

Maj.Do: Member; +85|6767|good old CA

that one tank scene in the trailer didnt look that good( the dust and the particles)

2006-08-02 22:14:20

#21

Psycho: Member since 2005; +44|6792|Kansas, USA

USAFDude_1988 wrote:
According to a senior FSX developer, that second picture is a "realistic" depiction of what kind of visual effects you can expect to see in DX10.. that's absolutely stunning.

The 2nd picture is an "artist" rendering. Don't believe the hype! While I hope I am wrong, forgive me if I don't believe the marketing machine from MS.

2006-08-02 22:15:30

#22

Maj.Do: Member; +85|6767|good old CA

Hmmmm are the new screen shots for crysis Dx10? or 9, i think there 9

2006-08-02 22:18:25

#23

={OGC}=HK-47: Eugoogalizer; +69|6589|Fountain Valley,CA

holy balls

2006-08-03 07:13:12

#24

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|6751|Salt Lake City

In terms of visuals, DX10 does not really offer anything not already in DX9. The primary difference is how the API handles calls and processes data. This was substantially altered, and was necessary to allow the better graphics to actually happen.

It also puts an end to the different shader methods employed by ATi and NV. MS has completely developed the shader engine, and to be DX10 compliant it will have to meet MS' criteria.

2006-08-03 07:50:29

#25

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|6732|Riva, MD

The trees look like shit in both pictures but other than that DX10 is lookin good, then again it's just a rendering. I heard that Microsoft has decided to make OpenGL incompatible with DX10, is this true?

BF2S Forums What DX10 Could Look Like...

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

vanmani wrote:

RichyCizzo wrote:

uk-anubis-uk wrote:

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

Board footer