21 ms·

Oh they are still working on DirectX 12. Microsoft has the tendency to downside and almost stop development after reaching near monopoly of a niche. Everyone r

by frik 10y ago

Oh they are still working on DirectX 12. Microsoft has the tendency to downside and almost stop development after reaching near monopoly of a niche. Everyone remembers the Internet Explorer 6 years, it took years and Firefox reaching 25% market share to continue development of IE7. The same with DirectX: DirectX 9 was too successful, and OpenGL supported was limited to OpenGL 1 in WinXP and onwards (only tricks like bootstrapping allows OpenGL2+ on Win). DirectX 9 was around for many years. When OpenGL 3 and 4 came around, Microsoft restarted development of DirectX 10. DirectX 11 was merely a maintenance release. When the new AMD API (now Vulcan) came along, Microsoft restarted development with DirectX 12. Nowadays 99.9% of all new games are DirectX10/11 or Vulcan and support Win7+ and are usually available over Steam and/or GoG. And PlayStation 4 is very successful worldwide. XBoxOne is mainly successful in US and has little presents worldwide, Microsoft even stopped announcing sales two years ago - it's that bad. Nor are there any new exclusive games to speak of, PS4 has dozends of exclusive games, Win7+ has millions of exclusive games. Win10 Store is a complete desaster, worst software ever and hardly anyone would use it to buy games, if there are far better alternatives like Steam and GoG. Is DirectX 12 still a thing?

dogma1138 10y ago
Because DX12 gives you support for 2 out of the 3 major AAA platforms. Sony seems to have no inclination of supporting Vulcan as a native API for the PS4/PS4pro. Vulkan is also not Mantle, it's similar to the original Spec which was written by Johan Andersson from DICE. AMD did give Khronos the spec but there isn't some shared code implementation for Vulkan that is based on Mantle, there isn't a common shared library in general as the implementation for each IHV/System is proprietary. Vulkan is still a camel, not as much as OpenGL but a camel nonetheless, it's currently quite behind DX as far as featureset goes and Vulkan Next which would add needed features such as mGPU support seems lag into late 2017. Vulkan is a good alternative but it already shows some signs of getting it self into the same position that OpenGL found it self. It's also worth noting that DX12 development has nothing to do with Mantle, it's a continuation of the Xbox 360 API and effectively the mature version of the API developed for the Xbox One.
- Tuna-Fish 10y ago
  > It's also worth noting that DX12 development has nothing to do with Mantle, it's a continuation of the Xbox 360 API and effectively the mature version of the API developed for the Xbox One. ... significant parts of DX12 are a carbon copy of Vulcan. Are you saying they ended up with the exact same solutions, including things like error codes that are entirely arbitrary choices, by accident? DX12, and the Xbox One API was NOT developed from the Xbox 360 API. It's based on Mantle. As is Vulkan.
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    Vulkan was influenced by DX12 designs not the other way around, Vulkan is currently lagging behind. Mantle was written by Johan Andersson and as a result of DICE working on FB3 for the XboxOne. The Vulkan spec diverges quite a bit from Mantle and is considerably closer to DX12, and again this isn't because DX12 somehow copies Vulkan, but because quite a few of the people involved like Niklas Smedberg and Aras Pranckevicius have been working with the XboxOne/PS4 for quite a while.
    - XzetaU8 10y ago
      Stop spreading misinformation, Vulkan was not influenced by DX12. > Vulkan is derived from and built upon components of AMD's Mantle API, which was donated by AMD to Khronos with the intent of giving Khronos a foundation on which to begin developing a low-level API that they could standardize across the industry, much like OpenGL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API)
      - dogma1138 10y ago
        It's not misinformation, AMD delivered the mantle spec to Khronos, but you are ignoring the fact the mantle spec was nearly single handedly written by Johan Andersson and was derived from his work on building Frostbite for consoles. Vulkan then was influenced by quite a few other people from Unity, Epic and Valve.
    - 10y ago
shmerl 10y ago
> Is DirectX 12 still a thing? Unfortunately, while MS will require DX for Xbox, it will remain a thing. It's not needed otherwise.
pandaman 10y ago
DX12 is the base for XBox One API so it's going to be a thing, I suppose, until MS pulls out of console business (but I don't see why they would, the original XBox was a bigger disaster yet they stayed). After all, both Sony and Nintendo use their proprietary APIs too. The reason you need a proprietary API on a console is that you cannot make a game running on a $200-300 piece of consumer electronics compete with a game running on a $1000+ PC if they both use the same API. There is a lot of work a DX/OpenGL driver does behind the scenes to make the same code run on GPUs of different architectures while sharing the same device with other processes. When you target only one GPU in exclusive mode you can do the same things so much faster.
- shmerl 10y ago
  Nintendo started to use Vulkan, so things are moving in the right direction, though pretty slowly. > The reason you need a proprietary API on a console is that you cannot make a game running on a $200-300 piece of consumer electronics compete with a game running on a $1000+ PC if they both use the same API. Their primary reason is to tax developers who want to release games cross platform. In practice, no one prevents console makers from making more expensive high end consoles. Those who want demanding games, would buy more expensive hardware. Console is just a type of human interface, nothing inherently in it requires it to be cheap. Same as in regular PCs. The only reason current incumbent consoles are like that is lack of proper competition in their space. Compare it to mobile hardware where competition is fierce.
  - slimsag 10y ago
    On which platform? I would LOVE some sources on this! (seriously! I would really appreciate it)
    - shmerl 10y ago
      See https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-products#vulkan https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-prod... (Search for Nintendo there). They support Vulkan on the Switch, which shows that they now see benefits in using cross platform APIs.
pjmlp 10y ago
Regardless of urban legends, game consoles have their own graphic APIs. PlayStation 4 doesn't use OpenGL either, rather LibCGM. From all other PlayStations, including the portable ones, only the PlayStation 3 did support a mixture of OpenGL 1.0 + NVidia's Cg for shaders in addition to their actual graphics API. Almost no one ever bother with it, other than creating game prototypes. Nintendo Switch has adopted Vulkan, but it remains to be seen if it will be any more successful on the market than Wii U was. None of the other Nintendo consoles do support OpenGL, rather they have an OpenGL-like API, GX and GX2. Actually if it wasn't for Apple's adoption of OpenGL ES 1.0 for the iPhone, the first hardware support after Nokia's N95, it wouldn't probably ever taken off on the mobile devices.
- shmerl 10y ago
  Revisit this topic when graphics APIs lock-in age will come to an end.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Middleware has already settled that question several years ago, only FOSS advocates without experience in the games industry keep wishing for a different outcome.
    - shmerl 10y ago
      Nothing is settled, until the tax of supporting multiple APIs exist. Don't imagine it comes for free. The price is paid, whether it's in the middleware or not. You pay this tax in various ways, from slower progress of game engines, to more bugs in your games. And it clearly demonstrates the intent. Those who push this tax on developers don't want faster progress and higher quality. They want lock-in.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Like I said, without experience in the games industry. That is not how professional game developers see it, attending a few GDC would help to understand this. Or if you don't want to pay for a ticket, there are plenty of talks available for free at GDC Vault.
robbies 10y ago
Beware all who are reading below this comment: it's aggressively misinformed. It starts with this comment, which is almost completely inaccurate. And then it continues from there. Wth HN...

by frik 10y ago

dogma1138 10y ago

Because DX12 gives you support for 2 out of the 3 major AAA platforms. Sony seems to have no inclination of supporting Vulcan as a native API for the PS4/PS4pro. Vulkan is also not Mantle, it's similar to the original Spec which was written by Johan Andersson from DICE. AMD did give Khronos the spec but there isn't some shared code implementation for Vulkan that is based on Mantle, there isn't a common shared library in general as the implementation for each IHV/System is proprietary. Vulkan is still a camel, not as much as OpenGL but a camel nonetheless, it's currently quite behind DX as far as featureset goes and Vulkan Next which would add needed features such as mGPU support seems lag into late 2017. Vulkan is a good alternative but it already shows some signs of getting it self into the same position that OpenGL found it self. It's also worth noting that DX12 development has nothing to do with Mantle, it's a continuation of the Xbox 360 API and effectively the mature version of the API developed for the Xbox One.

Tuna-Fish 10y ago
> It's also worth noting that DX12 development has nothing to do with Mantle, it's a continuation of the Xbox 360 API and effectively the mature version of the API developed for the Xbox One. ... significant parts of DX12 are a carbon copy of Vulcan. Are you saying they ended up with the exact same solutions, including things like error codes that are entirely arbitrary choices, by accident? DX12, and the Xbox One API was NOT developed from the Xbox 360 API. It's based on Mantle. As is Vulkan.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  Vulkan was influenced by DX12 designs not the other way around, Vulkan is currently lagging behind. Mantle was written by Johan Andersson and as a result of DICE working on FB3 for the XboxOne. The Vulkan spec diverges quite a bit from Mantle and is considerably closer to DX12, and again this isn't because DX12 somehow copies Vulkan, but because quite a few of the people involved like Niklas Smedberg and Aras Pranckevicius have been working with the XboxOne/PS4 for quite a while.
  - XzetaU8 10y ago
    Stop spreading misinformation, Vulkan was not influenced by DX12. > Vulkan is derived from and built upon components of AMD's Mantle API, which was donated by AMD to Khronos with the intent of giving Khronos a foundation on which to begin developing a low-level API that they could standardize across the industry, much like OpenGL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API)
    - dogma1138 10y ago
      It's not misinformation, AMD delivered the mantle spec to Khronos, but you are ignoring the fact the mantle spec was nearly single handedly written by Johan Andersson and was derived from his work on building Frostbite for consoles. Vulkan then was influenced by quite a few other people from Unity, Epic and Valve.
  - 10y ago

shmerl 10y ago

> Is DirectX 12 still a thing? Unfortunately, while MS will require DX for Xbox, it will remain a thing. It's not needed otherwise.

pandaman 10y ago

DX12 is the base for XBox One API so it's going to be a thing, I suppose, until MS pulls out of console business (but I don't see why they would, the original XBox was a bigger disaster yet they stayed). After all, both Sony and Nintendo use their proprietary APIs too. The reason you need a proprietary API on a console is that you cannot make a game running on a $200-300 piece of consumer electronics compete with a game running on a $1000+ PC if they both use the same API. There is a lot of work a DX/OpenGL driver does behind the scenes to make the same code run on GPUs of different architectures while sharing the same device with other processes. When you target only one GPU in exclusive mode you can do the same things so much faster.

shmerl 10y ago
Nintendo started to use Vulkan, so things are moving in the right direction, though pretty slowly. > The reason you need a proprietary API on a console is that you cannot make a game running on a $200-300 piece of consumer electronics compete with a game running on a $1000+ PC if they both use the same API. Their primary reason is to tax developers who want to release games cross platform. In practice, no one prevents console makers from making more expensive high end consoles. Those who want demanding games, would buy more expensive hardware. Console is just a type of human interface, nothing inherently in it requires it to be cheap. Same as in regular PCs. The only reason current incumbent consoles are like that is lack of proper competition in their space. Compare it to mobile hardware where competition is fierce.
- slimsag 10y ago
  On which platform? I would LOVE some sources on this! (seriously! I would really appreciate it)
  - shmerl 10y ago
    See https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-products#vulkan https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-prod... (Search for Nintendo there). They support Vulkan on the Switch, which shows that they now see benefits in using cross platform APIs.

pjmlp 10y ago

Regardless of urban legends, game consoles have their own graphic APIs. PlayStation 4 doesn't use OpenGL either, rather LibCGM. From all other PlayStations, including the portable ones, only the PlayStation 3 did support a mixture of OpenGL 1.0 + NVidia's Cg for shaders in addition to their actual graphics API. Almost no one ever bother with it, other than creating game prototypes. Nintendo Switch has adopted Vulkan, but it remains to be seen if it will be any more successful on the market than Wii U was. None of the other Nintendo consoles do support OpenGL, rather they have an OpenGL-like API, GX and GX2. Actually if it wasn't for Apple's adoption of OpenGL ES 1.0 for the iPhone, the first hardware support after Nokia's N95, it wouldn't probably ever taken off on the mobile devices.

shmerl 10y ago
Revisit this topic when graphics APIs lock-in age will come to an end.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Middleware has already settled that question several years ago, only FOSS advocates without experience in the games industry keep wishing for a different outcome.
  - shmerl 10y ago
    Nothing is settled, until the tax of supporting multiple APIs exist. Don't imagine it comes for free. The price is paid, whether it's in the middleware or not. You pay this tax in various ways, from slower progress of game engines, to more bugs in your games. And it clearly demonstrates the intent. Those who push this tax on developers don't want faster progress and higher quality. They want lock-in.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Like I said, without experience in the games industry. That is not how professional game developers see it, attending a few GDC would help to understand this. Or if you don't want to pay for a ticket, there are plenty of talks available for free at GDC Vault.

robbies 10y ago

Beware all who are reading below this comment: it's aggressively misinformed. It starts with this comment, which is almost completely inaccurate. And then it continues from there. Wth HN...