Guild Wars 2

I know it’s an RTS game but it shows how many particles/effects/units can appear on screen with Mantle / DX12. Now using the same techniques that allows them to render all those units without performance loss in WvW or big World Boss battles could easily lead to massive FPS boosts if GW2 was using DX12 or Mantle.

Imagine latency free, ultra high settings, fighting Tequatl or massive battles around Stonemist.

I use MSI Afterburner to count GPU VRAM and % usage (CPU too) and I can easily tell that none of them are maxed out when fighting big world bosses or at WvW. It’s not my hardware, it’s the inability for the GW2 game engine to manage so many draw calls.

Now this video I posted promises to make such massive scale battles playable. Despite what people on this thread say, I say it is well worth it. Fighting in massive battles should be one of the best aspects of this game, since the devs are focused on open world PVE.

I don’t think we are saying it’s not worth doing, it’s just not something that will ever rise to a priority for ANet to invest the money and manpower to do.

And it’s very different developing with it for a new game as shown in that video than retrofitting an old.

Behellagh.1468:

I don’t think we are saying it’s not worth doing, it’s just not something that will ever rise to a priority for ANet to invest the money and manpower to do.

I know. And that’s the reason threads like this one exist to show the merits of better APIs so maybe Anet devs put it on higher priority. Really same reason we see Bunny Ears, Berserker meta, Ascended gear and similar threads for other things. I can understand for things like Mounts and Duels to cause debates, but I will never understand why anyone would be opposed to adding a better API that is promising to allow massive scale battles (WvW or Open World bosses) to be playable at high frame rates.

tbh even jump to dx11 would be great…………

Behellagh.1468:

I don’t think we are saying it’s not worth doing, it’s just not something that will ever rise to a priority for ANet to invest the money and manpower to do.

And it’s very different developing with it for a new game as shown in that video than retrofitting an old.

What resources mate. Kings of Wushu is scheduled for release Q4’2015 and 2 of their engineers rewrote the game’s renderer for 6 weeks at this stage of development (when they are supposed to finalize the development and iron out bugs, not introduce new ones by implementing new renderer tech)

I’m willing to bet that ANet has better staff than Snail Games.

P.S: Just had a thought. Is ANet managing their staff the way their engine is managing hardware resources? :O pun intended

Skip a WTS tourney, give the prize money to bunch of devs on top of their regular salaries to code out Dx 11/12 support. Nobody will complain.

maddoctor.2738:

Behellagh.1468:

I don’t think we are saying it’s not worth doing, it’s just not something that will ever rise to a priority for ANet to invest the money and manpower to do.

I know. And that’s the reason threads like this one exist to show the merits of better APIs so maybe Anet devs put it on higher priority. Really same reason we see Bunny Ears, Berserker meta, Ascended gear and similar threads for other things. I can understand for things like Mounts and Duels to cause debates, but I will never understand why anyone would be opposed to adding a better API that is promising to allow massive scale battles (WvW or Open World bosses) to be playable at high frame rates.

Again, not opposed but trying to sell them on the business case of doing it isn’t going to be made with numerous threads calling them idiots for not jumping on it with whatever manpower and budget required to make it so. Simply something new comes along, Dx12, Mantle, Vulkan, Oculus Rift, etc. doesn’t mean that a developer will jump all over it and fold it in as a patch.

The games that do this are either have game engines used for multiple titles or are licensed to or from 3rd parties. In the first case that means you likely have a larger budget to draw from and adding these features for a new title means you can back port to existing ones nearly for free (options screen). If you license it then you have to “keep up with the Jones’” and match feature for feature with other licensed engines. Again it’s a bigger income stream than a single game.

Don’t confuse practical reasons why it’ll likely to not happen with thinking it would not be a welcome improvement. But so many are trivializing the ease of adding even Dx10/11 support.

A local college basketball coach normally reply to fans asking why player X doesn’t get more playing time with “well who do you want to sit out?” Same is true here, if you want ANet to put the manpower and budget toward this, what are you willing to live without longer? Are you willing for ANet to layoff content staff to hire more game engine staff? Because at the end of the day, the labor budget isn’t going to get magically bigger just because you want Dx11/12.

Ravenmoon.5318:

Behellagh.1468:

I don’t think we are saying it’s not worth doing, it’s just not something that will ever rise to a priority for ANet to invest the money and manpower to do.

And it’s very different developing with it for a new game as shown in that video than retrofitting an old.

What resources mate. Kings of Wushu is scheduled for release Q4’2015 and 2 of their engineers rewrote the game’s renderer for 6 weeks at this stage of development (when they are supposed to finalize the development and iron out bugs, not introduce new ones by implementing new renderer tech)

I’m willing to bet that ANet has better staff than Snail Games.

P.S: Just had a thought. Is ANet managing their staff the way their engine is managing hardware resources? :O pun intended

Skip a WTS tourney, give the prize money to bunch of devs on top of their regular salaries to code out Dx 11/12 support. Nobody will complain.

Again new game, still in development, not out yet. Also I would wager those two likely wrote the original renderer they replaced. It is not uncommon for those who wrote the original code to be several times faster at adding or fixing code than tossing it to someone new.

Also, don’t forget that the bones of this game’s renderer go back to the original GW one and has been retrofitted for Dx9 support Dx8 to Dx9, not as big of a paradigm shift as Dx9 to Dx10 (or Dx11/12).

So unless you can make a strong case to show that the effort required will retain players better than new content or get new players to buy the game, it will be a tough sell to the money guys.

+1 for DX12. Could be a huge boost for CPU-bound games like GW2.

I don’t have a clue if this have been asked yet.

AreaNet, Will the new Expansion of “Heart of Thorns” will bring, or a step closer to Dx11 and or 64Bit support in the future?

What the commuity think?

I don’t think so.

Here are some threads about the issue:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/Still-no-DX11/first#post4852799

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/What-about-promised-DX11-12/first#post4996937

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/DirectX-11-any-News

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/DirectX-11-2

You can find several more with a Google search.

Good luck.

64 bits support only is important for programs that require more then 2 GB memory. As GW2 is far from reaching that treshhold, 64 bits support doesn’t add anything to the performance of the game.

as for DX11 support. The biggest bottleneck in performance is not the graphical rendering itself, but the lag in big kitten events like zerg vs zerg and world bosses. Making use of any better graphical rendering would actuall increase this issue. In the end, DX11 requires more input, so the bottleneck of big events is only increased that way.

So in that case then, why do they switch CPU to the Graphic card then? this will bring down the power on the cpu then reduce the bottle neck.

Flex.5389:

So in that case then, why do they switch CPU to the Graphic card then? this will bring down the power on the cpu then reduce the bottle neck.

Cause they want a wider range of players to be able to play the game. Most computers have a decent CPU, but not all got a decent GPU.

The visual quality of the world is created for 80% by the drawing quality. They choose a very artistic style on purpose, it gives them the possibillity to create a game that is not so demanding. This means that people who normally don’t play games, can play this one.

When I started with GW1, I had a crappy pc (specially graphically) just cause I didn’t play games. However, watching GW1 at a friend got me convinced to get a copy myself and my pc back then could run it. Later I got a more decent rig, but without that first step I never picked up gaming. I know many people who got hooked on GW1 and later GW2 this way. So by keeping the GPU-requirements low (even though integraded intels are not supported, even they play the game reasonable well) they adress a much larger audience then most games and for many this is the first mmo they ever played cause of this.

Forget dx11 support dx12.
Even on older Gpus this is supported and the game is completely CPU bound, dx12 helps reduce the cpu usage drastically. Dx11 will offer no real benefit at all in performance.

There are threads already calling for dx12 support so we can get more than the 12 fps at large world boss events.

Any way DX11 or DX12, it do give to company to improve graphically/proformance. over time they can bring out better content. That not we are all asking in many threads. Having 64bit. Sharing the load between CPU and GPU option to use CPU on it own, on low end spec PC’s. or Both to cater for better PC’s, with using better thread cores in CPU/GPC. considering the South Bridge on Motherboard don’t have them now. it’s putting more stress on CPU alone. That’s why Intel improve their chips to try n cater the lost of the South Bridge. In return it uses more of its own CPU power to handle.

Component Minimum System Requirements
Operating System: Windows XP Service Pack 2 or Better
Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo 2.0 GHz, Core i3, AMD Athlon™64 X2 or better
Memory : 2 GB RAM
Hard drive: 25 GB available HDD space
Graphics card: NVIDIA® GeForce® 7800, ATI Radeon™ X1800, Intel HD 3000 or better (256MB of video RAM and shader model 3.0 or better)
Internet connection: Broadband Internet Connection
Input: Keyboard and mouse

If its not GPU Base and run on CPU only. why they say we need graphic card?
Most motherboards come with 256MB of video RAM and shader model 3.0 or better as standard?

TPMN.1483:

Forget dx11 support dx12.
Even on older Gpus this is supported and the game is completely CPU bound, dx12 helps reduce the cpu usage drastically. Dx11 will offer no real benefit at all in performance.

There are threads already calling for dx12 support so we can get more than the 12 fps at large world boss events.

The game is completely CPU bound only in WvW for some reason. In the rest of the game the GPU is what is reaching the 100% (at higher settings) and not the CPU. This “CPU Bound” idea was popular back in the BWE and it is used all the time to show “poor optimization” while aside from WvW it’s not true at all. I wish we’d stop seeing posts about GW2 being CPU bound, they are relics of the past and have little to do with reality.

To see more FPS at large world boss events no CPU or GPU will ever help, it’s the game engine itself that is struggling, easily verified by watching how CPU/GPU usage are not even close to 100% yet the game can’t go above 20-30fps on very good computer systems.

So changing their game engine to DX12/Mantle will solve most of the engine issues (if what the early benchmarks say about DX12 is actually true) however not all players will be able to see this improvement.

The minimum GPU required for the game is a NVIDIA® GeForce® 7800, ATI Radeon™ X1800 or Intel HD 3000, they are all very very old and cannot offer DX12 support, so any performance boost from DX12 won’t be visible with those cards.

Of course I doubt many people play on such old hardware, with that kind of hardware WvW or world bosses shouldn’t be very playable

mercury ranique.2170:

64 bits support only is important for programs that require more then 2 GB memory. As GW2 is far from reaching that treshhold, 64 bits support doesn’t add anything to the performance of the game.

Actually, the errors caused by running into that 2 gig limitation on high-end max-details machines during mass events (WvW fights for example) has become more and more common lately. And that’s not about loss of performance, but about actual crashes. Unlike with higher Dx, going 64 bit is not just a desired improvement to the game, but is going to be a necessity eventually.

mercury ranique.2170:

64 bits support only is important for programs that require more then 2 GB memory. As GW2 is far from reaching that treshhold, 64 bits support doesn’t add anything to the performance of the game.

Incorrect.

64-bit is about much more than memory capacity.

Although memory capacity is important in that regard; any computer that contains more than 3.5 GB of memory is severely kitten with only 32-bits, as the extra memory can only be used by 64-bits.

Currently, with my main character idling in Hoelbrak, GW2 is using 1.060 GB of main memory on a system with a 4GB dedicated video card and 16GB main memory, running 50fps. Even with system overhead, GW2 is in no danger of having memory problems. However, I can run browsers and other apps without running out of RAM.

However, memory is not the only advantage of 64-bit, especially if you do anything other than gaming. Just recently, Adobe stated that they support only 64-bit code going forward for all applications. Most 64-bit processors have advanced instruction sets and 64-bit math can be faster than 32-bit.

If you stick to just gaming on 32-bit, don’t waste money on more memory, and be sure to limit background processes.

Not all of us have dx12 i dont.
Still dosen’t mean i cant run every single program out there.

Flex.5389:

Component Minimum System Requirements
Operating System: Windows XP Service Pack 2 or Better
Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo 2.0 GHz, Core i3, AMD Athlon™64 X2 or better
Memory : 2 GB RAM
Hard drive: 25 GB available HDD space
Graphics card: NVIDIA® GeForce® 7800, ATI Radeon™ X1800, Intel HD 3000 or better (256MB of video RAM and shader model 3.0 or better)
Internet connection: Broadband Internet Connection
Input: Keyboard and mouse

If its not GPU Base and run on CPU only. why they say we need graphic card?
Most motherboards come with 256MB of video RAM and shader model 3.0 or better as standard?

The game uses the cpu mostly because of the amount of data it has to crunch on the client, it still needs a gpu(or apu) to render the frames and those specs are because DirectX 9 requires 256mb of ram and it IS the shader model 3.0 spec.

Now on to those minimum specs:
Windows XP is a non-supported operating system by its creator – Microsoft doesn’t support it anymore (except corporate customers that can’t be bothered to enter the new millenium).
Dual core is pretty much the minimum specification to be called a computer now and they are all 64-bit architectures.
2gb of ram simply because the game is 32-bit.

I wish that we could just end the 32-bit era all at once so that all our future games could actually use our resources. Remember kids if you have unused resources on a computer, they are being WASTED. That 32gb of ram you have? yeah, it’s all wasted because your games will never use it because some of the players might be using a 32-bit operating system!

Looking forward to the big update for 64bit client and directX11+ but I think they’re saving that for the gw3 reveal – you know they’re already conceptualizing it right? I hope they get over the “we have to make our own engine” stage and use one that has decades of experience and hundreds of games backing it up like the unreal or cryengines.

I have commented like this in several threads about this issue. And YES Anet i’ll say it again.

Do you guy even try bro ?

Someone here brought to the discussion a Kor MMO, but i will bring an AAA MMO to be “FARE”: Final Fantasy 14 A Realm Reborn.
FF14 used to have an old engine, worse gaming experiences than GW1 in their original FF14. Then they tore down the whole game, rework the story, engine and gameplay; FF14ARR came out. Since the first day, FF14ARR standard setting have better graphic with better performance than our beloved GW2, i can have average 58 fps with very high settings in high pop place when it’s freaking 20ish fps in Divinity Reach and guest what? They use a DX9 engine. SE also said something like Anet about “considering dx11 later after launch”, did SE ignore that? No, on June 19th 2015, FF14 arr will have their expansion with a dx11 client that provide more beautiful graphic with good performance, and SE will keep optimize it for better performance like they had done with the old client before.

I know that SE have more money than Anet. But Anet should have done something about the game client. Just optimize it.

Ps1: If FF14 ARR had better PvP contents than GW2, i hadn’t logged in this game since 2013. Bad english from an Asean sorry.
Ps2: just in case i don’t have a superior PC, newest things on it is a 3 years old GPU. yeah anet my old timer GPU fully compliant with dx11 and supporting dx12.

silvermember.8941:

It isn’t always about improving gameplay, yes we can all agree it will. Nobody here is arguing that having Dx 11 support isn’t going to be beneficial, so effectively you are arguing against a point one disagrees with.

The issue here is, it is WORTH the cost to ARENANET.

Is improving the game worth the cost to A-Net?

Is making a very good product (and not just an “ok” product) worth the cost to a company?

Some companies think they can sell a “just OK” product and make a lot of money.
Some other companies want to create an outstanding product, thats better than most of the other similar products of their competitors. Both are valid business decisions.

So, the next question is: What kind of company is A-Net? In the past they have shown they want to create a product thats better than the products of their competitors.

In the art department they have succeded (my opinion). In the “graphics engine and game engine department” they have not and they are even “a few years” behind competitors.

How important is a better graphics/game engine for A-Net? Not very important, I suppose.

But it will become more important if reviews say things like “nice art but outdated graphics engine” and if more and more customers demand it. Because thats how it could have an influence on sales.

How likely will this happen? I do not know.

Brother Grimm.5176:

My numbers were made up to make a point. NOBODY is going to allow anyone to invest significant resources without 2 things:

1) An insurmountable problem that MUST be fixed.
2) A significant return in potential revenue.

Neither of those apply here. The game as it is is NOT suffering for lack of DX11 support (it is NOT a MUST for the game to continue).

The other side of this is supporting multiple versions since they certainly CAN NOT discontinue support for the DX9 version. Despite what most player seem to think, that would actually INCREASE their recurring costs as well (having to test any change at least twice….having to do EVERYTHING twice).

Not gonna happen.

Is that so?
WvW players can’t play normally, people with latest gear run Witcher3 that requires tons of money invested into new pcs. and they can run it with 100FPS..
GW2 can’t be run with 100FSP in wvw, like EVER..

And as much as i would love to say that you are right, there is tons of code that has to be fixed and redone correctly.

The code is done correctly, though. Actually, I’d argue GW2’s code base is probably one of the most optimized I’ve seen in recent games.

The problem is we’re seeing only partial utilization of hardware: only one cpu core can be utilized, and offloading the tasks to the gpu is just not feasible since most of the processing is logical and not just number crunching formulae.

Given the support for multiple cpu cores, almost all graphical issues pertaining to performance would cease.

DeceiverX.8361:

The code is done correctly, though. Actually, I’d argue GW2’s code base is probably one of the most optimized I’ve seen in recent games.

The problem is we’re seeing only partial utilization of hardware: only one cpu core can be utilized, and offloading the tasks to the gpu is just not feasible since most of the processing is logical and not just number crunching formulae.

Given the support for multiple cpu cores, almost all graphical issues pertaining to performance would cease.

I make a living building highly-optimized multicore code, and there aren’t very many of me.

Oh, it’s relatively easy to write multi-THREADED applications, but doing multi-CORE correctly is tricky and the expertise rare and pricey. To properly balance divergent independent-but-coordinated processes is complex, and VERY difficult to backport into large older codebases like GW. Really, to do multi-CORE well, you need to start from the core design stage.

Do I want to see 64-bit multi-CORE GW? You betcha!

Will it happen? Without an economic incentive, no.

Sytherek.7689:

mercury ranique.2170:

64 bits support only is important for programs that require more then 2 GB memory. As GW2 is far from reaching that treshhold, 64 bits support doesn’t add anything to the performance of the game.

Incorrect.

64-bit is about much more than memory capacity.

Although memory capacity is important in that regard; any computer that contains more than 3.5 GB of memory is severely kitten with only 32-bits, as the extra memory can only be used by 64-bits.

You are incorrect. A 64 bits processor running a 64 bits OS is emulating a 32 bits program into a 64 bits mode. So while each program (process actually) is limited to 2gig, they can extend the 2gig as high as the 64 bits support (which is theoratical 16.8 million terrabites, so in this case you hit the limit of the mainboard). It is a common mistake to say that, just cause a 32 bit OS had this limitation, this also counts for the cumulative amount of ram used by 32bits programs on a 64 bits machine. 32 bits is emulated to 64 bits and so cumulative it can extend to the max of the machine, but per process it can’t extend the 2 gig.

I’m sure this has been asked quite a lot, but with the upcoming expansion will we see an upgrade from dx9 to dx11 or even dx12?
I’m not talking about graphic improvements but multi threading optimization that comes from dx11 since this is an mmo after all and there is a lot to rely on your cpu, wich today normally is usually 4 threads or above.

The answer is no.

We don’t know but I suspect no. The reason being that although dx 9 sucks, the cost of rewriting their engine probably does not make it a worthwhile endeavor from a financial standpoint. I mean if it was, they would have already done it.

We want dx12 since it coming out soon with win 10, however the dev’s have said H.O.T will run on the same hardware we have now and no need for us to go buy any new hardware.

at 7min 25 sec

JediYoda.1275:

We want dx12 since it coming out soon with win 10, however the dev’s have said H.O.T will run on the same hardware we have now and no need for us to go buy any new hardware.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2dBqAw7C3U

at 7min 25 sec

Considering dx12 are exclusive to more modern graphics cards and windows 10, I don’t see directx 12 happening for a LONG time.

PlatinumMember.5274:

JediYoda.1275:

We want dx12 since it coming out soon with win 10, however the dev’s have said H.O.T will run on the same hardware we have now and no need for us to go buy any new hardware.

Considering dx12 are exclusive to more modern graphics cards and windows 10, I don’t see directx 12 happening for a LONG time.

But it’s still backwards compatible to those who don’t have dx12 video card.

JediYoda.1275:

PlatinumMember.5274:

JediYoda.1275:

We want dx12 since it coming out soon with win 10, however the dev’s have said H.O.T will run on the same hardware we have now and no need for us to go buy any new hardware.

Considering dx12 are exclusive to more modern graphics cards and windows 10, I don’t see directx 12 happening for a LONG time.

But it’s still backwards compatible to those who don’t have dx12 video card.

My point is, why would they invest the resources into it, if it only benefits a very small fraction. One of the draw backs of playing a b2p game that only had its first xpac after 3 years, is that they don’t have a lot of money to be investing in non-essential upgrades.

That’s how it seems anyways, to me. (I am not against dx12 btw, I am simply looking at it from a business standpoint).

PlatinumMember.5274:

JediYoda.1275:

PlatinumMember.5274:

JediYoda.1275:

We want dx12 since it coming out soon with win 10, however the dev’s have said H.O.T will run on the same hardware we have now and no need for us to go buy any new hardware.

Considering dx12 are exclusive to more modern graphics cards and windows 10, I don’t see directx 12 happening for a LONG time.

But it’s still backwards compatible to those who don’t have dx12 video card.

My point is, why would they invest the resources into it, if it only benefits a very small fraction. One of the draw backs of playing a b2p game that only had its first xpac after 3 years, is that they don’t have a lot of money to be investing in non-essential upgrades.

That’s how it seems anyways, to me. (I am not against dx12 btw, I am simply looking at it from a business standpoint).

Forward preparation, and the ability to utilize new technology to keep the game relevant? A huge problem with MMOs is their inability (older games) or unwillingness (newer games) to utilize new hardware for their benefits. WoW has survived long enough for this to become a problem. And they have upgraded their engine with improved graphical calls (which was born on DX8 with WC3, and now supports DX11 to some extent). The art style doesn’t lend well to DX11’s capabilities, but they are infact supported.

And if you think for one second that GW2 isn’t making money, you’re insane. The Gemstore has generated so much money over the last 3 years (with some cosmetic and utility collections costing as much as the game itself), that the only way they would be losing money would be through criminal levels of mismanagement.

And judging by the steady loss of good faith in the community, I’d say mismanagement would be a reasonable assumption at this point. The game was obviously profitable enough for the better part of 2 years after launch. The switch to Xpacs was made in light of their inability to release LS content that promoted Gem sales over time. Its not surprising, as most of the skins other then Frost and Flame (Fused), and the Sky Pirates saga (Aetherblade) were hit and miss with the players. Not to mention LS content degraded into massive farm fests in Season 2.

I sincerely hope that if ANet is rebuilding their engine to support another API, please be Vulkan.

And one more thing. For now, you guys are all hooked in stuff a marketing department is saying. DX12 won’t be absurd FPS gains with no latency.

First of all the dev from the game engine group posted recently about this in a Reddit thread saying the render is not the bottleneck limiting framerate and therefore going to a “faster” API is of little benefit.

Second, if given a choice of APIs do you honestly think they will one that is hardware vendor specific or not the API every GPU manufacturer writes drivers by default? If you haven’t heard AMD has stopped work on Mantle. And as it was for OpenGL on consumer platforms, I don’t think GPU manufacturers will spend anywhere near the same amount of time optimizing Vulkan as they will with Dx12.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/3ajnso/bad_optimalization_in_gw2/csdnn3n

They can do as they like. There are a number of better optimized titles coming out in the next year. Player attention will be spread across a lot of other games in the near future, and GW2 is already behind as is. The PC market is full of players who like to spend their money on rigs that let them play maxed out with little stuttering, rate drop, etc, and moving between titles where this is and isn’t an issue will catch up over time.

Dinosaurs will die. HoT seems like more of the same, there were already a lot of complaints about how the pre-order was handled, and lagging behind the competition performance-wise will just be one more hurdle to overcome. SWTOR manages because of great story-telling; that game would be all but dead otherwise. I have logged into GW2 exactly twice in the past three months, and knowing that it’s never going to be optimized, or at least not in the near future, really doesn’t up my desire to check back in.

We don’t pay ANET enough for them to take out resources to change the engine. So, unless we are buying 100USD of gems daily for the next 1 year, it will still be the same engine until they start GW3.

Prototypemind.4026:

They can do as they like. There are a number of better optimized titles coming out in the next year. Player attention will be spread across a lot of other games in the near future, and GW2 is already behind as is.

What titles are you talking about ? Some more generic asian grinders with Unreal
or Crytec Engine ? Is maybe Cabal 2 the next Killer Game ?

The only game i am maybe interestet in at the moment is one with an Engine
das is even a lot more unoptimized that GW2, because it also uses a selfmade
Voxel Engine.

And even the game with Crytec or Unreal Engine had often massive performance
problems when there were massive blobs of players. Ever been in Giran in Lineage 2
or in big Abyss fights in AION ?

When Windows 10 is released with DirectX12, would the game be updated for DX12 for those with compatible graphics cards?

As in, will they rewrite their engine to use DX12? No.

ArenaNet uses their own in-house engine which is an improved GW1 engine. Upgrading it isn’t a simple task and something like that wouldn’t happen until several years after the release of Windows 10 and only if it’s dominant within the player base. Hints of DX10 for example were found back in the days of beta and it never happened. Don’t expect to see the engine change until GW3.

Devs have stated that Dx9 isn’t the cause of the poor performance that those who want Dx12 claim Dx12 would fix. It’s not the rendering path that is bottlenecking.

Could Dx11/12 give us more complex shaders or higher rez textures so it becomes the bottleneck? Sure but what does that do but make the game “prettier” at the same underperforming, according to some, frame rate.

And once again the lack of any type of search causes yet another thread about this topic. How many this week? Two or three, not counting the merged one that pops to the top every so often?

But doesn’t Dx12 give you twice the frames per second to do the same exact stuff that Dx11 does but better? You should read up on how it gets better performance. My question is, what bottleneck of Dx12? Also, what difficulty to implement? Do you actually know? Not that it matters, as it’s a decision that ArenaNet needs to decide, or probably more their managers. But I will tell you this, there is a demand.

Loli Ruri.8307:

But doesn’t Dx12 give you twice the frames per second to do the same exact stuff that Dx11 does but better? You should read up on how it gets better performance. My question is, what bottleneck of Dx12? Also, what difficulty to implement? Do you actually know? Not that it matters, as it’s a decision that ArenaNet needs to decide, or probably more their managers. But I will tell you this, there is a demand.

Yes there is a demand since the beta. This has been discussed in 32345656 other posts and turned out it’s too much work in other words too much money to spend on. So it was buried. Ever since the mantle came up people started to realise a better API would increase the performance and it should in theory but Anet still doesnt give a kitten about it. Im not expert on game coding but think of Batman Arkham Knight pc version. It’s atleast that hard to implement ^^ even huge companies like those can kitten. up that bad on porting games. So if I were you I wouldnt count on Anet’s decision making team to have better performace out of the game.

Loli Ruri.8307:

But doesn’t Dx12 give you twice the frames per second to do the same exact stuff that Dx11 does but better? You should read up on how it gets better performance. My question is, what bottleneck of Dx12? Also, what difficulty to implement? Do you actually know? Not that it matters, as it’s a decision that ArenaNet needs to decide, or probably more their managers. But I will tell you this, there is a demand.

DX12 can also cure cancer o.O

In all honesty .. read this :
https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/3ajnso/bad_optimalization_in_gw2/csdnn3n

So the decision to do or not do should be based on somebody elses terrible job at porting? Is that the benchmark?

The real issue has to do with multi-threading. Using metal on GPU is just one of many ways that can be used to off-load work.

Imho the decision to do or not is based on the money they will be having in return. Let’s say they spend like 100$ to make it happen, it should atleast make them 100$ extra moneh. Also it’s been almost 3 years since the game release would they bother doing something like that for a game that’s already aging? I dont think so. Batman was just an example to show you how hard it actually is and what happens when you do it wrong. I’m one of the many people in the forum who have been asking for the dx11 support since the gw2 beta. Im just saying demand was always been there it’s never met and will probably never be met for the gw2 atleast.

muslumgurseks.4951:

Imho the decision to do or not is based on the money they will be having in return. Let’s say they spend like 100$ to make it happen, it should atleast make them 100$ extra moneh. Also it’s been almost 3 years since the game release would they bother doing something like that for a game that’s already aging? I dont think so. Batman was just an example to show you how hard it actually is and what happens when you do it wrong. I’m one of the many people in the forum who have been asking for the dx11 support since the gw2 beta. Im just saying demand was always been there it’s never met and will probably never be met for the gw2 atleast.

Good MMO’s don’t really need to have an expiration-date, so 3 years is nothing.. but that only holds true in you indeed keep updating this sort of things. So the game only really ages if you let it age.

One of the reasons that WoW is so successful is because of this (they do use DX11 and will likely implement DirectX 12).

its kind of weir, i mean having a titan x hibryd and yet the same graphics, and lag, i mean WTF!

Devata.6589:

Good MMO’s don’t really need to have an expiration-date, so 3 years is nothing.. but that only holds true in you indeed keep updating this sort of things. So the game only really ages if you let it age.

One of the reasons that WoW is so successful is because of this (they do use DX11 and will likely implement DirectX 12).

Are you honestly thinking that the reason WoW is successful is due to them using DX11?

You are aware that it was successful before they made that upgrade as well, right?