Crysis DirectX 9 & 10 MP Performance [Sep 13, 2007, 10:23 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
Total Crysis offers an update on how
multiplayer will work in Crysis (thanks
Voodoo Extreme). A number of topics are covered, including how DirectX 9
servers will be limited compared to DirectX 10 servers, not because of software,
but hardware:
DX9 vs. DX10 – The endless question
To shed some light into one of the most discussed topics regarding Crysis multiplayer I would like to explain you the differences between Crysis MP DX9 and DX10.
As for the DX9 version we won’t have physics and day and night cycle in-game. That means you won’t be able to shoot down trees and/or alter any other objects than vehicles on the map. Additionally the time of day setting doesn’t change dynamically. This is caused due to the tremendous server load such physics might cause on crowded gaming servers. Still you will be able to experience maps with different time of day settings since the maps can be altered in the Sandbox2 Editor.
Rather than providing the community partially working features we limit this for the DX10 version only. Due to the strong hardware available with DX10, server load is less and performance is increased. This ensures the pure physics and day and night cycle experience without any limitation.
Gamers with a DX10 card are able to play on DX9 servers, but with the limitation of the respective server. Vice versa it is not possible for gamers with DX9 cards to play on DX10 servers due to the limited features.
You keep equating DirectX versions with physics.
I keep equating it because the developers have equated it by making DirectX 10 the determining factor of whether advanced physics will be enabled. If you read my posts it should be obvious that I don't believe that DirectX 10 should have any effect on such physics since games which predate DirectX 10 obviously didn't need it for their advanced physics.
Since you persist to not read my posts and address my valid points on reasons why DX10 may make sense, let me ask you 2 simple questions?
What if they use the DX10 API for the massive amounts of objects while exploding, which DX9 cannot, and leverage the geometry shaders for this functionality as well, would that help you understand?
Would it be so horrible if a developer actually tapped the real benefits of DX10 for once, by leveraging the new API to handle the effects?
This comment was edited on Sep 14, 12:05.
I keep equating it because the developers have equated it by making DirectX 10 the determining factor of whether advanced physics will be enabled. If you read my posts it should be obvious that I don't believe that DirectX 10 should have any effect on such physics since games which predate DirectX 10 obviously didn't need it for their advanced physics.
Since you persist to not read my posts and address my valid points on reasons why DX10 may make sense, let me ask you 2 simple questions?
What if they use the DX10 API for the massive amounts of objects while exploding, which DX9 cannot, and leverage the geometry shaders for this functionality as well, would that help you understand?
Would it be so horrible if a developer actually tapped the real benefits of DX10 for once, by leveraging the new API to handle the effects?
This comment was edited on Sep 14, 12:05.
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2025 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2025 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 19 July 2025, 20:16.