7 ms·

Maybe I missed it in reading the article but what, specifically, is not available to developers if they choose to write the application against the typical Win3

by mdip 11y ago

Maybe I missed it in reading the article but what, specifically, is not available to developers if they choose to write the application against the typical Win32 APIs? Are they, for instance, making certain hardware accelerated APIs only available for UWP apps? If so, are these APIs designed in such a way as to prevent someone from creating an API that runs on top of Win32 that exposes the capabilities (i.e. by requiring drivers be locked down in such a way as to disallow interaction outside of UWP)? I can't see a way outside of driver feature lock-out that the OS could effectively prevent game developers from developing games the way they have been in the past. I'm guessing this has a lot to do with their "Write it for Xbox One and it'll work on Windows 10, too" goals, but that feels more like a convenience than a lock-in -- games are a constant exercise of porting to get them on each platform, so getting them onto a non-UWP target would be another platform (which many developers would simply skip since UWP would be theoretically easier).

Tepix 11y ago
This is the key question. If Microsoft decides one day to offer the next DirectX version only for UWP then the developers will either have to eat humble pie or leave the platform.
- speeder 11y ago
  This is confusing, and I don't found enough data yet. But seemly DX12 IS heavily tied to UWP, for example there were many rumors in gaming forums, that some UWP "features" (like locked vsync at 60 FPS, and game always being full-screen window, not allowing true fullscreen or true window) will be enforced in games that use DX12. There is also rumors it is the other way around, that to use certain DX12 features you must make the app at least UWP compatible, this mean locking vsync and making it only support borderless fullscreen... But the situation is just a mess and I don't found any comprehensive data yet.
  - cwyers 11y ago
    Rumors in gaming forums and a dollar will get you something off the dollar menu at McDonalds. People in gaming forums say all kinds of things and a lot of them are absurd conspiracy theorists. I've yet to see anyone point out an actual technical feature of UWP that you can't get by delivering a normal Windows app through Steam, just store features like crossbuy with Xbox One. There are several features that normal Windows apps have that UWP apps don't have yet, as noted, and DirectX 12 is fully available to all Windows apps. Honestly, if we're picking the lesser of two evils, I'll pick Microsoft over Valve, the company that just got around to notifying people of security breaches that happened over Christmastime this week. Valve seems to be in this weird place where they don't want to make retail games anymore because of all the Steam cash they have rolling in but they don't want to actually have to manage Steam, they want users to curate the store for them and basically are engaging in less-than-benign neglect.
    - anon4 11y ago
      I am perfectly capable of curating my own games. The last thing I want is Valve to get in morality politics and decide what is and isn't "good for the children" or whatever else crap. They should allow you to subscribe to curators and see only approved games, maybe, but Valve themselves should absolutely not be censoring the site.
    - anon4 11y ago
      I am perfectly capable of curating my own games. The last thing I want is Valve to get in morality politics and decide what is and isn't "good for the children" or whatever else crap. They should allow you to subscribe to curators and see only approved games, maybe, but Valve themselves should absolutely not be censoring the site.
- arien 11y ago
  I don't think that would be a smart move. Considering Steam is one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) gaming hubs for Windows and other platforms, if they blocked this and somehow forced people to use the Store/XBox instead, it could backfire and lead gamers en masse to the Steam OS and hardware, for example. These "migrations" of users from one service to another should happen naturally to be successful. Not enforced because of platform restrictions, but based on these new platforms being actually better and more desirable for the end user.
  - slavik81 11y ago
    It would be now, but that seems to be why Valve created SteamOS in the first place. They were clearly worried about the same things as Epic and wanted to have the threat of a viable platform for people to migrate to if Microsoft treated the open Windows platform poorly.
- ZenoArrow 11y ago
  Can't they use Vulkan instead of DX12? I would've thought Vulkan would be supported on the Windows platform.
  - KirinDave 11y ago
    It is not clear they would want to though. Developers are heavily invested in DX.
    - ZenoArrow 11y ago
      My understanding (and this could be false) is that many games are based on externally developed game engines, such as Unreal and Unity. If these game engines make use of Vulkan (which they are almost bound to do so, CryEngine already has early support) then does it make any difference to the developers of the games? The only thing I could think of where it might matter is if the GPU drivers have better support for DX12 than Vulkan, resulting in better performance, but I have no idea if that's the case.
      - KirinDave 11y ago
        It's not uncommon for people using engines to still need to appeal to the underlying frameworks.
  - whitegrape 11y ago
    It would likely be in addition to, but I think even those heavily invested in DX (whether using their own engine or on top of someone else's), which is certainly a shrinking group since there's a much broader emphasis on cross-platform compatibility these days (especially mobile), would still consider Vulkan if only so that the 35% of Steam Windows gamers still on 7 that could use DX 12 if they were on 10 can enjoy the benefits too. (There's even more reason to use Vulkan if there's a sizable set of GPUs that support it but don't support DX12, not sure about that though.)
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  > This is the key question. If Microsoft decides one day to offer the next DirectX version only for UWP then the developers will either have to eat humble pie or leave the platform. Couldn't they just keep using the previous version of DirectX?
  - talmand 11y ago
    That will eventually turn into a question like "Why not just keep using Win16?"
    - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
      It isn't meant to be permanent. It's meant to be a a stopgap until developers have time to transition to something which is neither DirectX nor Windows.
j_s 11y ago
I think XBox Live interop is not available via Win32 APIs, only UWP.

by mdip 11y ago

Tepix 11y ago

This is the key question. If Microsoft decides one day to offer the next DirectX version only for UWP then the developers will either have to eat humble pie or leave the platform.

speeder 11y ago
This is confusing, and I don't found enough data yet. But seemly DX12 IS heavily tied to UWP, for example there were many rumors in gaming forums, that some UWP "features" (like locked vsync at 60 FPS, and game always being full-screen window, not allowing true fullscreen or true window) will be enforced in games that use DX12. There is also rumors it is the other way around, that to use certain DX12 features you must make the app at least UWP compatible, this mean locking vsync and making it only support borderless fullscreen... But the situation is just a mess and I don't found any comprehensive data yet.
- cwyers 11y ago
  Rumors in gaming forums and a dollar will get you something off the dollar menu at McDonalds. People in gaming forums say all kinds of things and a lot of them are absurd conspiracy theorists. I've yet to see anyone point out an actual technical feature of UWP that you can't get by delivering a normal Windows app through Steam, just store features like crossbuy with Xbox One. There are several features that normal Windows apps have that UWP apps don't have yet, as noted, and DirectX 12 is fully available to all Windows apps. Honestly, if we're picking the lesser of two evils, I'll pick Microsoft over Valve, the company that just got around to notifying people of security breaches that happened over Christmastime this week. Valve seems to be in this weird place where they don't want to make retail games anymore because of all the Steam cash they have rolling in but they don't want to actually have to manage Steam, they want users to curate the store for them and basically are engaging in less-than-benign neglect.
  - anon4 11y ago
    I am perfectly capable of curating my own games. The last thing I want is Valve to get in morality politics and decide what is and isn't "good for the children" or whatever else crap. They should allow you to subscribe to curators and see only approved games, maybe, but Valve themselves should absolutely not be censoring the site.
  - anon4 11y ago
    I am perfectly capable of curating my own games. The last thing I want is Valve to get in morality politics and decide what is and isn't "good for the children" or whatever else crap. They should allow you to subscribe to curators and see only approved games, maybe, but Valve themselves should absolutely not be censoring the site.
arien 11y ago
I don't think that would be a smart move. Considering Steam is one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) gaming hubs for Windows and other platforms, if they blocked this and somehow forced people to use the Store/XBox instead, it could backfire and lead gamers en masse to the Steam OS and hardware, for example. These "migrations" of users from one service to another should happen naturally to be successful. Not enforced because of platform restrictions, but based on these new platforms being actually better and more desirable for the end user.
- slavik81 11y ago
  It would be now, but that seems to be why Valve created SteamOS in the first place. They were clearly worried about the same things as Epic and wanted to have the threat of a viable platform for people to migrate to if Microsoft treated the open Windows platform poorly.
ZenoArrow 11y ago
Can't they use Vulkan instead of DX12? I would've thought Vulkan would be supported on the Windows platform.
- KirinDave 11y ago
  It is not clear they would want to though. Developers are heavily invested in DX.
  - ZenoArrow 11y ago
    My understanding (and this could be false) is that many games are based on externally developed game engines, such as Unreal and Unity. If these game engines make use of Vulkan (which they are almost bound to do so, CryEngine already has early support) then does it make any difference to the developers of the games? The only thing I could think of where it might matter is if the GPU drivers have better support for DX12 than Vulkan, resulting in better performance, but I have no idea if that's the case.
    - KirinDave 11y ago
      It's not uncommon for people using engines to still need to appeal to the underlying frameworks.
- whitegrape 11y ago
  It would likely be in addition to, but I think even those heavily invested in DX (whether using their own engine or on top of someone else's), which is certainly a shrinking group since there's a much broader emphasis on cross-platform compatibility these days (especially mobile), would still consider Vulkan if only so that the 35% of Steam Windows gamers still on 7 that could use DX 12 if they were on 10 can enjoy the benefits too. (There's even more reason to use Vulkan if there's a sizable set of GPUs that support it but don't support DX12, not sure about that though.)
AnthonyMouse 11y ago
> This is the key question. If Microsoft decides one day to offer the next DirectX version only for UWP then the developers will either have to eat humble pie or leave the platform. Couldn't they just keep using the previous version of DirectX?
- talmand 11y ago
  That will eventually turn into a question like "Why not just keep using Win16?"
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    It isn't meant to be permanent. It's meant to be a a stopgap until developers have time to transition to something which is neither DirectX nor Windows.

j_s 11y ago

I think XBox Live interop is not available via Win32 APIs, only UWP.