Majority of software is usualy up to 5 year behind of the newest hardware advancement, has never been different the past 10 years as far as i can remember.
However, hardware advancement and hardware performance is not necessarely a match. At the start of DX10 and DX11 for example most hardware was to weak in order to create a sufficient performance using the maximum tech level possible. So, indeed many hardware is able to support advanced tech but insufficient at delivering the proper muscles. However, nowadays the newest hardware is indeed able to run DX11 related technology at a very satisfying level, so its pretty much the hardware being ahead of the software. So we are now at a situation when the software simply cant catch up with hardware anymore. Many people say, it doesnt matter so we dont need newest hardware anymore (we will soon be able to run most games on a Intel IGP/AMD APU) and art count is more important than tech count anyway. It might be true but why not to have everything at once, for the ultimate experience? Guess nowadays consumers are just to much used to transportable devices and cheapest solutions possible. So they are willing to trade off a lot of potential in order to fit those other needs, but kinda it dont have to be. We could have the bread and the butter at once but of course thats the theory and not necessarely practical. Certainly when PS4 and XboxOne been released, we may see some advancement on the tech side, so it gonna be a interesting time for PC users too.
PSO2 is completly different direction. PSO2 is tuned in order to be fit on as many machines as possible and nowadays it can easely be run on a IGP or APU, so "tech count" is very minor and a good example for the direction many games are heading nowadays. Its heading to a completly different direction, the spot where mobile and "social" users are located at, away from "core players". Its tuned wholely on a art tech level in order to make fans of that kind of art enjoy as much of it as possible and able to be run on as many machines as possible (basically as good as every machine not older than 5 years can run it without problems). Its neither good nor bad, but the hardware advancement will soon be so far ahead of the software that we shouldnt even mention the word "tech" anymore. It will be able to be run on a IGP/APU from a tablet in the next 5 years i guess, so i wouldnt expect to much tech but simply enjoy its "art" and the social aspect of the game.
About that funny Win 7/8 battle: Most of the performance is still gotten from the processors and SSD people are using, not from any OS. DX11 will be the "state of art" for countless years, not anything higher than that. The time when we finally get the first DX12 games, at that time there is already another OS released by MS, so i wouldnt worry, the fight is just all about preference, nothing else. Regarding DX 11.1, there isnt any changes worth to mention and in the graphical aspect there wont be any viewable differences. There is almost no game even using it and if so, nothing we would even notice.Apart from that DX is a proprietary MS interface but its not a tech itself (some people mistaken it as a tech), its simply a interface. As an interface (API) its able to implement certain techs but it could be done using another interface too, DX isnt the only solution, but a good one. Im almost certain that we will be stuck on DX11 related tech for countless years and no other viewable improvements at all.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Xenobia
Connect With Us