Guild Wars 2

silvermember.8941:

tl;dr Gw2 focuses more on aesthetics than graphics. This video will help you understand the difference, so that next time you wont say something dumb. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oK8UTRgvJU

How about not reinforcing your own lack of intelligence by trying to win an internet argument you clearly lost? And are still loosing, badly I might add.

So then put all setting on low. I guess the left over “aesthetics” are still way too graphically extravagant for you?
Heed your own advice and watch the vid again yourself.
Hint: it´s a package deal.

And when for example the gfx engine is so crappy that the whole game crashes because of memory issues, then aesthetics can go take a break.

Am I really seeing a flame war go on in here? That’s pathetic.

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

He might get close to 60 FPS if those people weren’t attacking things

Avelos.6798:

Am I really seeing a flame war go on in here? That’s pathetic.

Nah, just the usual on this board.
What´s actually sad is that it will likely rain infractions on all, thread gets half deleted and everything will looks right as rain.
And ANet stays silent again, squandering yet another chance to respond clearly to a vital problem.

ezd.6359:

BTW. You can see gw2 used CPU more than GPU. I think it is because they process some unusual things for CPU. And DirectX 11 can increase perfomance even more.

In general PvE exploring the GPU is used more than the CPU, I don’t know if it’s true for all CPU/GPU combos (I can’t possibly test them all) but on a lot of machines, mine and of friend’s the GPU gets to 100% usage quickly while the CPU is sitting idle. And we are talking about systems with higher end GPUs than CPUs.

This changes drastically in WvW for some reason it almost feels like everything is rendered by the CPU there, like 100% CPU usage, horrible graphic lag, and the GPU idles at 10% usage, doesn’t make much sense to me but it happens.

HawkMeister.4758:

Avelos.6798:

Am I really seeing a flame war go on in here? That’s pathetic.

Nah, just the usual on this board.
What´s actually sad is that it will likely rain infractions on all, thread gets half deleted and everything will looks right as rain.
And ANet stays silent again, squandering yet another chance to respond clearly to a vital problem.

they’re all too busy responding spvp section. In that section you get 3+ devs per day, here its one per week or more

Nuka Cola.8520:

HawkMeister.4758:

And ANet stays silent again, squandering yet another chance to respond clearly to a vital problem.

they’re all too busy responding spvp section. In that section you get 3+ devs per day, here its one per week or more

Makes sense.
Asia launch is imminent, which means we need constantly new grindy content and a working sPvP environment.
Incidentally the gameplay this client has the least technical problems with.

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

I never declared something like this. Why do you think it is a.net fault? Lets go cry on intel forums OMG YOUR PROCESSORS ARE SO SLOW, I HAVE 10 FPS WHEN 1000 PEOPLE AROUND!!!11

ezd.6359:

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

I never declared something like this. Why do you think it is a.net fault? Lets go cry on intel forums OMG YOUR PROCESSORS ARE SO SLOW, I HAVE 10 FPS WHEN 1000 PEOPLE AROUND!!!11

You said your FPS is good with 100 ppl on the screen.

Granted, I have no idea what you think is a “good” FPS, but industry standard is usually to aim at your monitor’s refresh rate, which is 60 FPS in most cases.

I would wager your “good” FPS with 100 ppl on the screen would be below 30 FPS which by any standard should not be “good”.

But if you’re happy with it, all the power to you.

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

I never declared something like this. Why do you think it is a.net fault? Lets go cry on intel forums OMG YOUR PROCESSORS ARE SO SLOW, I HAVE 10 FPS WHEN 1000 PEOPLE AROUND!!!11

You said your FPS is good with 100 ppl on the screen.

Granted, I have no idea what you think is a “good” FPS, but industry standard is usually to aim at your monitor’s refresh rate, which is 60 FPS in most cases.

I would wager your “good” FPS with 100 ppl on the screen would be below 30 FPS which by any standard should not be “good”.

But if you’re happy with it, all the power to you.

of course he’s happy with his 20fps. its not like its allowed to say anything negative about gw2 (for some people) and he can’t do anything to improve his fps, so he lowers his standards and accept 20fps as “good”

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

I never declared something like this. Why do you think it is a.net fault? Lets go cry on intel forums OMG YOUR PROCESSORS ARE SO SLOW, I HAVE 10 FPS WHEN 1000 PEOPLE AROUND!!!11

You said your FPS is good with 100 ppl on the screen.

Granted, I have no idea what you think is a “good” FPS, but industry standard is usually to aim at your monitor’s refresh rate, which is 60 FPS in most cases.

I would wager your “good” FPS with 100 ppl on the screen would be below 30 FPS which by any standard should not be “good”.

But if you’re happy with it, all the power to you.

lolwhat? Refresh Rate =/= FPS not in any case.

My fps is comfortable in 99.9% of my gameplay. And once again: i feel myself much better than in other games.

And again. Why do you think it is arena.net fault? You are 100% sure this game can give you more FPS, but theirs programmers are just bad. You have 100% professional opinion that arena.net is incompetent, right?

If not, what are you asking for? Magic?

Nuka Cola.8520:

of course he’s happy with his 20fps. its not like its allowed to say anything negative about gw2 (for some people) and he can’t do anything to improve his fps, so he lowers his standards and accept 20fps as “good”

My standarts are based on my experience. Other games are worse, so gw2 exceeds expectations. Tell me your experience. Your standarts are based on [put your example here].

ezd.6359:

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

Tom Gore.4035:

ezd.6359:

I am fine. I feel myself better than in other games like Aion. BTW this game requires better processors, not video cards. So i always play on max settings. You can try max settings too, no impact at all.

With 100 people around servers lag sometimes, but my fps is good.

Sorry man, but you’re full of kitten. With 100 people on the screen and everything maxxed you’re not running anywhere near 60 fps with your setup. Not. A. Chance.

I never declared something like this. Why do you think it is a.net fault? Lets go cry on intel forums OMG YOUR PROCESSORS ARE SO SLOW, I HAVE 10 FPS WHEN 1000 PEOPLE AROUND!!!11

You said your FPS is good with 100 ppl on the screen.

Granted, I have no idea what you think is a “good” FPS, but industry standard is usually to aim at your monitor’s refresh rate, which is 60 FPS in most cases.

I would wager your “good” FPS with 100 ppl on the screen would be below 30 FPS which by any standard should not be “good”.

But if you’re happy with it, all the power to you.

lolwhat? Refresh Rate =/= FPS not in any case.

My fps is comfortable in 99.9% of my gameplay. And once again: i feel myself much better than in other games.

And again. Why do you think it is arena.net fault? You are 100% sure this game can give you more FPS, but theirs programmers are just bad. You have 100% professional opinion that arena.net is incompetent, right?

If not, what are you asking for? Magic?

I didn’t imply FPS = Refresh rate. Where did you get that? All I said that it’s become an industry standard to aim to maintain 60 FPS in a game, because anything above that will lose some of it’s flashiness because the monitor cannot draw it fast enough (I know higher FPS still affects your input responsiveness, but that’s another story).

You still didn’t say what you consider as a comfortable frame rate? 60? 40? 20?

It is Arenanet’s fault because games that have as much stuff on the screen and look better still run faster than GW2. They did make a lot of improvements at beta and right after launch and it got better, but then they just stopped. My money is that they fired or lost their optimization guru. There have been zero client optimizations for about 10 months now. You really think the client is now 100% optimized and there’s nothing to do, even if I tell you that GW2 is not utilizing nearly all the power in my GTX 670 in WvW, because my oh-so-crappy 3770k running at 4.2Ghz per core is running at 100%?

Why do you defend these guys? You don’t think they should hire (back) some client programmers and work on optimizing their software further and start working on a DX11 mode for the client? They can afford FOUR content teams to chug out bi-weekly content patches, but can’t afford ONE team to work on making the client better, adding features, etc.?

Tom Gore.4035:

I didn’t imply FPS = Refresh rate. Where did you get that? All I said that it’s become an industry standard to aim to maintain 60 FPS in a game, because anything above that will lose some of it’s flashiness because the monitor cannot draw it fast enough (I know higher FPS still affects your input responsiveness, but that’s another story).

60 FPS is just enough. Not because it is your monitor’s refresh rate. And i don’t think someone aims to maintain some FPS. It is just metrics. People do things as good as they can.

Tom Gore.4035:

You still didn’t say what you consider as a comfortable frame rate? 60? 40? 20?

30 is ok. But i have more in most situations.

Tom Gore.4035:

It is Arenanet’s fault because games that have as much stuff on the screen and look better still run faster than GW2.

Examples?

Tom Gore.4035:

They did make a lot of improvements at beta and right after launch and it got better, but then they just stopped. My money is that they fired or lost their optimization guru. There have been zero client optimizations for about 10 months now. You really think the client is now 100% optimized and there’s nothing to do, even if I tell you that GW2 is not utilizing nearly all the power in my GTX 670 in WvW, because my oh-so-crappy 3770k running at 4.2Ghz per core is running at 100%?

They just don’t include all minor changes in change log. I am sure – they make optimizations all time when they can. Just some things are easy to implement, some are just impossible without rewriting 99% of code. May be they can optimize something, may be not. I don’t know. And you too. But you still give advices who to hire. You just want MORE MORE MORE without any acceptable arguments. What exactly they do wrong?

Tom Gore.4035:

Why do you defend these guys? You don’t think they should hire (back) some client programmers and work on optimizing their software further and start working on a DX11 mode for the client? They can afford FOUR content teams to chug out bi-weekly content patches, but can’t afford ONE team to work on making the client better, adding features, etc.?

I think it is acceptable level of optimization and i don’t ask for more. In my eyes you blame them for nothing.

Tom Gore.4035:

There have been zero client optimizations for about 10 months now. You really think the client is now 100% optimized and there’s nothing to do, even if I tell you that GW2 is not utilizing nearly all the power in my GTX 670 in WvW, because my oh-so-crappy 3770k running at 4.2Ghz per core is running at 100%?

A sad fact is that GPUs are hardly being utilized in WvW, you may get 100% GPU usage in big PvE events but even in huge 100vs100 in WvW it won’t go above 10%. For some reason WvW uses mostly the CPU, I haven’t run tests lately to see if it’s any more optimized now, but I think it’s still the same…

However, in PvE the GPU is utilized far better (not perfect) and if anything it is the real reason for performance issues.

ezd.6359:

http://youtu.be/Q2FpZuqOnHs
I just recorded video to show my game performance. I used playclaw 4 to record and show overlays. I can’t guarantee they show reliable information. Keep in mind i record 1920×1200 with high quality. Record process eats ~10-15 fps. I play with 40-60 FPS in 99.9% of the time.

Well, when I’m wrong I’m wrong. I honestly didn’t think a recording like this was possible. Nice video.
(I still want DX11 and more optimization so in-the-middle computers could experience this as well ^^ )

The thing about WvW is that the CPU gets stressed so much in high-model battles because the data pathway tends to be receive packets->process packets to information->pull up and compile relevant data->check for occlusion->send off to GPU for rendering.

The render part is automatically done by the GPU, but the part that has sooo much stress to the CPU is the first three phases, especially in large scale battles since you’re tracking a kittenton metric of stuff on screen flying around (in particular, forty characters(20vs20) alone makes 40x number of objects, since you have to pull up data about class, armor, weapon, as well as any attached minions). You’re also calculating and tracking every state change to health, and conditions present in every character, not to mention on your own. Finally, you’re also calculating the data about world objects (state of siege gear, any consumables dropped on the field or bundles, NPCs and character data, as well as map-wide information).

The issue here is that if you try to hand it off to the GPU, you need to write longer code since the tradeoff in the CPU vs GPU is that the CPU has more processing complexity but lower overall processing as compared to the GPU, not to mention that you have to watch for data synchronization between the CPU and the GPU.

Redesigning the code ground up to take advantage of CUDA should be a viable solution, but it -will- take a lot of investment and time to shift properly to that model.

Shifting to Dx11 may improve render times, but your bottleneck here is the CPU code, and it needs to be parallelized even more that your regular parallelization methods.

And then you threw off 90% of people in this thread. Love it Are you saying that using Dx11 properly will in fact not increase framerate for Gw2, provided that our CPU are the setbacks, or just that it won’t make that much of a difference in that regard?

Advent Leader.1083:

Redesigning the code ground up to take advantage of CUDA should be a viable solution, but it -will- take a lot of investment and time to shift properly to that model.

Which of course wouldn’t work out so good for AMD users.

The golden GW2 machine would be a tri core CPU running at 5.5ghz.
The devs failed to realize that parallel computing would take place instead of raw clocks. The game is designed to have many multiple people in heavy fights in WvW, the issue is that the game and the servers cannot handle it.
When you have modern 4 core 8 thread and higher CPU’s being bottlenecked by a game that is not fully utilizing its’ resources then you have a major issue. It won’t matter if I buy that new 12 core 24 core or 100 core CPU.
Future technology will have 0 bearing in any performance increase in GW2 without optimization and rewriting of the code.

Four pages and no devs bothered to mention if, and only if we may see DX11 one day

I would rather see the game use multi core processors more efficiently rather than a new API but; then again, one can only dream.

marnick.4305:

If there’s a good reason to do so, maybe. I don’t know why they’d put any effort into that at the current time, there’s far more pressing issues.

I Totally Agree

HawkMeister.4758:

silvermember.8941:

tl;dr Gw2 focuses more on aesthetics than graphics. This video will help you understand the difference, so that next time you wont say something dumb. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oK8UTRgvJU

~toot

Standard forum rules, if you cant win an argument insult the person. I proved my point.

Nuka Cola.8520:

Four pages and no devs bothered to mention if, and only if we may see DX11 one day

Why would they? They already made an official statement that wont suddenly change because a few people that are known to consistently criticize the game because it doesn’t appeal to them, but are in in denial about it or love the hear themselves complain, are calling them out.

Nuka Cola.8520:

Grimwolf.7163:

Nuka Cola.8520:

Avelos.6798:

Nuka Cola.8520:

Lévis.5489:

Guild Wars 1 w3as originally a DX8 game . Took them until Factions’ release to make the game DX9 .

No DX11 is a crime against any computers built after 2009 .

MMO or not, not having DX11 support in a PC EXCLUSIVE title released in 2012 is a joke especially when games run better in dx11.

Having it in Direct X 11 would upset people with Direct X 10 cards, which there is still a fairly high number of compared to DX9 cards now. I could see this game going as far as DX10 for now but not DX11 and I highly doubt GW2 will upgrade to DX10 to begin with. If there is a ‘Guild Wars 3’ game in the future, maybe it will use Direct X 11. But it doesn’t really matter though, the game looks great either way.

Also wouldn’t this topic be better suited for the Tech support forums?

Why would it upset anyone? DX11 support doesn’t mean DX9 won’t be supported anymore… DX11 would be for those who own a gaming rig and DX9 for those gaming on a computer from Bestbuy lol

Bestbuy? I run GW2 on a freakin’ TABLET and I have DX11.

on a tablet? lol wtf. What’s next? DX12 when played on iphone?-.-

I actually tried that on my nexus 7. Worked almost perfectly. I need to find out how to make AoEs work properly. Other than that I have to somehow fix the inventory because when I tried equipping items it didn’t work. Also it melts your battery. I did get a bit of lag but that was because my PC was lagging from the windowed mode.
Back on topic: I’d really like to see DX11 in GW2. I doubt that WvW is a problem since you can always make it set everyone else to basic skins with a blue/red/green color. Maybe if/when they’re done pouring money into living story content and make an expansion we’ll see some improvements on the code, DX11 and proper use of good CPUs.

I was excited to try out Guild Wars 2 on my new computer, but the performance seems to be kinda lackluster considering the hardware I have:

SSD
Nvidia GTX 660
Intel i5 3570
8 gb ram

I’m assuming one of the reasons they’re using DX9 is due to the way they’ve implemented Mac support. WoW uses opengl for the Mac version, which also makes it run extremely well in Linux too. I’d like to see them do something like this, and also DX11 support, then they’d really be reaching more people.

No, they choose Dx9 because development started in 2007 and Dx11 wasn’t out until Windows 7 which was in 2009. Sure they could have targeted Dx10 but nobody liked Vista and so most gamers were still on XP which was Dx9.

DX 11 support would be amazing even if I had to re download the game all over again for a fresh install sure would be nice over DX9 performance I get with my specs on this game. _

I think Anet uses their own game engine, so it’s hard to know how difficult implement directx 11 is.

Visual fidelity aside DX 11 is a far more efficient API. World of Warcraft runs roughly 30% faster in the DX 11 version and doesn’t even use the improved visuals.

Guild Wars 2 is a much younger game and frankly it’s inexcusable for it to be based on such an outdated version of DX. And it’s not like they even had consoles to worry about.

I mean DX 11 has been the standard since….what?….2009? That’s 3 years prior to GW2 even being released.

Dee Jay.2460:

Visual fidelity aside DX 11 is a far more efficient API. World of Warcraft runs roughly 30% faster in the DX 11 version and doesn’t even use the improved visuals.

Guild Wars 2 is a much younger game and frankly it’s inexcusable for it to be based on such an outdated version of DX. And it’s not like they even had consoles to worry about.

I mean DX 11 has been the standard since….what?….2009? That’s 3 years prior to GW2 even being released.

Im not sure about dx11 being standart back in 2009, but im sure that even CONSOLES will have soon dx11.

Omaris Mortuus Est.2738:

Do you think this game will ever support dx11?

Well, apart from the re-coding involved, it depends how Winders 9 goes. All that work just to require Win 8 (DX11.1x)? This isn’t a tablet or console game, after all.

Scoobaniec.9561:

Dee Jay.2460:

Visual fidelity aside DX 11 is a far more efficient API. World of Warcraft runs roughly 30% faster in the DX 11 version and doesn’t even use the improved visuals.

Guild Wars 2 is a much younger game and frankly it’s inexcusable for it to be based on such an outdated version of DX. And it’s not like they even had consoles to worry about.

I mean DX 11 has been the standard since….what?….2009? That’s 3 years prior to GW2 even being released.

Im not sure about dx11 being standart back in 2009, but im sure that even CONSOLES will have soon dx11.

Consoles don’t have Direct X. It’s entirely a windows API. Consoles have their own APIs which are often managed by the manufacturer and are a lot more “low-level” so they allow more customization.

Dee Jay.2460:

Consoles don’t have Direct X. It’s entirely a windows API. Consoles have their own APIs which are often managed by the manufacturer and are a lot more “low-level” so they allow more customization.

Xbox One

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

Charak.9761:

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

You mean all those games that changed DX version during their run time were re-created from scratch?

maddoctor.2738:

Charak.9761:

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

You mean all those games that changed DX version during their run time were re-created from scratch?

MMOs are seperate from single player games like Crysis. There’s alot more revolving around the design code for the sandbox version of an MMO than a linear path of other games. In cost effectiveness, it’s just easier for ncsoft to just pass on this upgrade.

Charak.9761:

maddoctor.2738:

Charak.9761:

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

You mean all those games that changed DX version during their run time were re-created from scratch?

MMOs are seperate from single player games like Crysis. There’s alot more revolving around the design code for the sandbox version of an MMO than a linear path of other games. In cost effectiveness, it’s just easier for ncsoft to just pass on this upgrade.

Who talked about Crysis? FF14 saying something? Fact is: performace would be much better in dx11.

Charak.9761:

MMOs are seperate from single player games like Crysis. There’s alot more revolving around the design code for the sandbox version of an MMO than a linear path of other games. In cost effectiveness, it’s just easier for ncsoft to just pass on this upgrade.

For your information LotRO upgraded to Dx11 post launch.

The game looks pretty good graphics wise.
Optimization however is terrible – I bought a high-end machine only to see that it doesn’t really help with GW2 that much.
They should really improve on the texture quality, and DX11 wouldn’t be that bad either.

Dee Jay.2460:

Visual fidelity aside DX 11 is a far more efficient API. World of Warcraft runs roughly 30% faster in the DX 11 version and doesn’t even use the improved visuals.

Guild Wars 2 is a much younger game and frankly it’s inexcusable for it to be based on such an outdated version of DX. And it’s not like they even had consoles to worry about.

I mean DX 11 has been the standard since….what?….2009? That’s 3 years prior to GW2 even being released.

Except the game development started in 2007, likely engine first. WoW added Dx11 support later. Of course WoW was making in the neighborhood of a BILLION dollars in sales every year since Dx11 came out so I don’t thing they had a problem hiring as many people as they needed to implement it. ANet is a bit smaller with quite a lot less in sales.

Charak.9761:

maddoctor.2738:

Charak.9761:

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

You mean all those games that changed DX version during their run time were re-created from scratch?

MMOs are seperate from single player games like Crysis. There’s alot more revolving around the design code for the sandbox version of an MMO than a linear path of other games. In cost effectiveness, it’s just easier for ncsoft to just pass on this upgrade.

Wat?
Anyhoot, it would require a new rendering engine for the client. Quite a bit of work, a year, two… But like the game engine and server side are all good. But the rendering engine, big work, specialized work. M$ never makes anything easy

Behellagh.1468:

Except the game development started in 2007, likely engine first. WoW added Dx11 support later. Of course WoW was making in the neighborhood of a BILLION dollars in sales every year since Dx11 came out so I don’t thing they had a problem hiring as many people as they needed to implement it. ANet is a bit smaller with quite a lot less in sales.

Yet, Anet and CCP both have the same size dev team ( ~200), but CCP did this with EVE? I wish I had a dime every time WoW was brought up in this forum, would mean free internetz for me hehe. But seriously, an indie did it… and big Anet/NCsoft at a loss? But then maybe for CCP the investment was worth it, they have stated that their goal is to be still operating EVE in ten more years.

Daywolf.2630:

Charak.9761:

maddoctor.2738:

Charak.9761:

Nope, they built their engine on DX9, they can’t change that without making a new game.

You mean all those games that changed DX version during their run time were re-created from scratch?

MMOs are seperate from single player games like Crysis. There’s alot more revolving around the design code for the sandbox version of an MMO than a linear path of other games. In cost effectiveness, it’s just easier for ncsoft to just pass on this upgrade.

Wat?
Anyhoot, it would require a new rendering engine for the client. Quite a bit of work, a year, two… But like the game engine and server side are all good. But the rendering engine, big work, specialized work. M$ never makes anything easy

Behellagh.1468:

Except the game development started in 2007, likely engine first. WoW added Dx11 support later. Of course WoW was making in the neighborhood of a BILLION dollars in sales every year since Dx11 came out so I don’t thing they had a problem hiring as many people as they needed to implement it. ANet is a bit smaller with quite a lot less in sales.

Yet, Anet and CCP both have the same size dev team ( ~200), but CCP did this with EVE? I wish I had a dime every time WoW was brought up in this forum, would mean free internetz for me hehe. But seriously, an indie did it… and big Anet/NCsoft at a loss? But then maybe for CCP the investment was worth it, they have stated that their goal is to be still operating EVE in ten more years.

How many years was EVE out before they rolled out a Dx11 client? Oh that’s right, it’s not out yet, they simply demoed Dx11, over a year ago. You can point at them once the new client is pushed out to live. Otherwise it’s just a tech demo along with PhysX support, also demoed at the same time (not surprisingly nVidia was helping out).

So on one hand we have a 10 year old game that doesn’t have Dx11 support yet but did have a demo of one ship in an asteroid field Vs a game that’s only been out a year without Dx11 support.

Now as for WoW, this is from one of their CS people on their forum.

Lurdlespor
Customer Service
Hello,

Graphically you won’t see any major difference, the only real difference is that later graphics adapters are optimised for Directx 11, so you may experience better performance.

However if you do experience issues with it (we’re still working on improving our Directx 11 support), then please do switch back to Directx 9.

Sounds like they have everything well in hand after 3 years since they introduced the first Dx11 supported client. And this is from the game with BILLIONS in sales in those years. You would think they would be able to get people to knock this conversion out of the ballpark with the resources they have.

So it appears neither easy nor trivial, as some have stated, to add Dx11 support into an existing Dx9 game.

(Yes it’s a bit of a strawman argument.)

Daywolf.2630:

Dee Jay.2460:

Consoles don’t have Direct X. It’s entirely a windows API. Consoles have their own APIs which are often managed by the manufacturer and are a lot more “low-level” so they allow more customization.

Xbox One

Even the Xbone isn’t built on Direct X 11. While it retains many elements of it Direct X isn’t efficient and “low-level” enough for consoles. They need more customization and flexibility than DX 11 can offer.

Dee Jay.2460:

Daywolf.2630:

Dee Jay.2460:

Consoles don’t have Direct X. It’s entirely a windows API. Consoles have their own APIs which are often managed by the manufacturer and are a lot more “low-level” so they allow more customization.

Xbox One

Even the Xbone isn’t built on Direct X 11. While it retains many elements of it Direct X isn’t efficient and “low-level” enough for consoles. They need more customization and flexibility than DX 11 can offer.

amd released their mantle api. I wonder if anet will want to support it.

Behellagh.1468:

How many years was EVE out before they rolled out a Dx11 client? Oh that’s right, it’s not out yet, they simply demoed Dx11, over a year ago. You can point at them once the new client is pushed out to live. Otherwise it’s just a tech demo along with PhysX support, also demoed at the same time (not surprisingly nVidia was helping out).

So on one hand we have a 10 year old game that doesn’t have Dx11 support yet but did have a demo of one ship in an asteroid field Vs a game that’s only been out a year without Dx11 support.

Nice slant but CCP has already announced (CCP Mankiller did) that they are in fact working on it. Unless you suggest that they are lying, which wouldn’t be consistent in this case since they rolled out Trinity which they stated took longer than will take for DX11. So it’s been a year, yeah? And like I mentioned previously, its a job that can take a year, two years, depends how many work on the project. I’m not guessing, been through it, though with an older version, and just linked to the project as I don’t program graphics engines. But we are talking man hours of around five years, and chances are they have more than one man doing it, ya know? As I mentioned, CCP and Anet have about the same size of staffing.

Yes, EVE has been around for ten years, and the client has been rebuilt once at the mid-point. Ncsoft has been around for 16 years. Anet 13 years. CCP 16 years. So you are trying to make a point that anet is at a disadvantage? NCsoft has published over 20 games. Anet has had two successful video games. CPP has two video games and working on a third. Well, CCP has announced that they are working on it, NCsoft/Anet has not. Seeing that it could take a couple years, I think the disadvantage is there, but not the way you put it, but that GW2 will fall behind with old technology 5+ years behind the curve as it has already become old technology.

How will that effect the longevity of the game? There has been no mention of DX11 here, in a game that could really use the performance boost already. Though it makes sense they seem to be waning away from “expansions” since mmo’s usually make expansions that outdo launch state development. But as it stands, they are still just tweaking the existing system to even make the existing content work, but you can only get so much out of that. So yeah, temporary content will most likely be all they can do, because it’s not likely that they will be able to release bigger and better content that most gamers expect.

Dee Jay.2460:

Even the Xbone isn’t built on Direct X 11. While it retains many elements of it Direct X isn’t efficient and “low-level” enough for consoles. They need more customization and flexibility than DX 11 can offer.

uh-huh… you’re argument reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNL0KfD0nts

Daywolf.2630:

Dee Jay.2460:

Even the Xbone isn’t built on Direct X 11. While it retains many elements of it Direct X isn’t efficient and “low-level” enough for consoles. They need more customization and flexibility than DX 11 can offer.

uh-huh… you’re argument reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNL0KfD0nts

ummm, dee jay is right?

consoles uses a minimalistic api that is closer to bare metal. Direct X overhead is huge. If anet uses the newly released amd mantle api, then most of GW2 bottlenecks will disappear or minimized.

DirectX 11 is another high level graphic api, you still have to rearchitect the engine to take advantage of multithreading which is hard.