56 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

Yep shipped with dx11 ...they said they are using like Ray tracing techniques but using dx11.

No. It makes zero sense to convert DX12 after it is released unless they are talking about plans for a much later version with ray tracing here.

They also specifically stated they are not using ray tracing ( there will be no RTX card requirement) but using what they describe as a "temporal" solution.

 

 

Edited October 27, 20196 yr by Mucker

12 hours ago, Mucker said:

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks. At exactly 19:15 they mention it.

1 hour ago, Mucker said:

No. It makes zero sense to convert DX12 after it is released unless they are talking about plans for a much later version with ray tracing here.

They also specifically stated they are not using ray tracing ( there will be no RTX card requirement) but using what they describe as a "temporal" solution.

 

 

No?  What I wrote is what they're doing.  

People should just forget about ray tracing right now. Current hardware is not capable enough to run a full flegded flight sim with ray tracing on. Maybe the will introduce it in a couple of years time along with dx12 when we have rtx 4000 series.

2 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

No?  What I wrote is what they're doing.  

Well can you post a link to show where that was said then because that is twice you have made that statement as fact when all we have is that currently it is DX11 and at some point they will switch to DX12.

As I said how does selling the product as a DX11 product and then changing to DX12 make any sense? The only way it would make sense is as a new saleable product (Expansion pack or something) with other new features that made it worth upgrading and not as an after market patch but even then it would make far more sense to make it DX12 at release.

1 hour ago, Baber20 said:

People should just forget about ray tracing right now. Current hardware is not capable enough to run a full flegded flight sim with ray tracing on. Maybe the will introduce it in a couple of years time along with dx12 when we have rtx 4000 series.

Early leaks suggest Ampere will have some big ray-tracing performance improvements, so we might be looking at very decent performance this time next year.

5 minutes ago, Mucker said:

As I said how does selling the product as a DX11 product and then changing to DX12 make any sense? The only way it would make sense is as a new saleable product (Expansion pack or something) with other new features that made it worth upgrading and not as an after market patch but even then it would make far more sense to make it DX12 at release.

It would be similar to Flight Simulator X and the DirectX 10 patch. With DirectX 12 there is a good potential performance increase (since it massively reduces the driver overhead on the main thread and moves the workload across more threads), and it would allow for ray-tracing and other visual effects. Since the simulator will be a showcase of Azure and Bing, it would be a missed opportunity not to be a DirectX 12 and DXR showcase as well. And I have the feeling that it would support DirectX 12 at launch had its development started later.

Also I'm not too sure about this, but a DirectX 12 implementation could make it easier to port it over to the Xbox One family as well.

5 hours ago, Gabe777 said:

So anyone know when tech alphas will be downloadable ?

 

maybe tomorrow who knows ;)

2 hours ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

Early leaks suggest Ampere will have some big ray-tracing performance improvements, so we might be looking at very decent performance this time next year.

It would be similar to Flight Simulator X and the DirectX 10 patch. With DirectX 12 there is a good potential performance increase (since it massively reduces the driver overhead on the main thread and moves the workload across more threads), and it would allow for ray-tracing and other visual effects. Since the simulator will be a showcase of Azure and Bing, it would be a missed opportunity not to be a DirectX 12 and DXR showcase as well. And I have the feeling that it would support DirectX 12 at launch had its development started later.

Also I'm not too sure about this, but a DirectX 12 implementation could make it easier to port it over to the Xbox One family as well.

 

Yes I understand all that but DX12 is already available so it would make far more sense for it to be DX12 at release IMO but as an upgrade pack well down the line with ray tracing and other goodies then maybe.

Not sure ray tracing offers big performance gains either, especially for something as complex as an open world with multiple light sources. Laminar stated that was why they weren't looking at ray tracing because it is inappropriate for a flight sim but then again the team working on MSFS2020 have done wonders with their current system that is a very cost effective pseudo ray tracing approach and it will be very interesting to see which way they go. DX12 will offer performance benefits though through the Dev's being better able to control the workload on threads and off load some tasks to other threads plus it is just quicker than OpenGL.

We will likely know for certain as development progresses and more news leaks out. 

5 hours ago, Mucker said:

As I said how does selling the product as a DX11 product and then changing to DX12 make any sense? The only way it would make sense is as a new saleable product (Expansion pack or something) with other new features that made it worth upgrading and not as an after market patch but even then it would make far more sense to make it DX12 at release.

Very odd comment, moving to DX12 gives better performance, an option not available to the team when they started 4/5 years ago. We have no information when a DX12 update will occur, so you can safely assume it will be on the backlog and will be done when it's time to do so. I don't understand the point about upgrading - this isn't introducing new features nor will it impact (if done properly) the existing features so at a technical level at least it's irrelevent when it gets done before or after release.

1 minute ago, dtrjones said:

Very odd comment, moving to DX12 gives better performance, an option not available to the team when they started 4/5 years ago. We have no information when a DX12 update will occur, so you can safely assume it will be on the backlog and will be done when it's time to do so. I don't understand the point about upgrading - this isn't introducing new features nor will it impact (if done properly) the existing features so at a technical level at least it's irrelevent when it gets done before or after release.

Ray tracing in hardware wasn’t there 4-5 years ago either.

1 hour ago, dtrjones said:

Very odd comment, moving to DX12 gives better performance, an option not available to the team when they started 4/5 years ago. We have no information when a DX12 update will occur, so you can safely assume it will be on the backlog and will be done when it's time to do so. I don't understand the point about upgrading - this isn't introducing new features nor will it impact (if done properly) the existing features so at a technical level at least it's irrelevent when it gets done before or after release.

 I have no idea what you are thinking here. How does anything you have said make DX12 coming as a patch more likely than DX12 coming at release?

We know it is being implemented so DX12 not being available when they started development is completely irrelevant, what is relevant is whether it will be for fullr elease or, in a patch or as a saleable package with other features down the road.

The point about it being more likely coming for release is because it can help sell more copies (better performance for one) and also help Microsoft promote DX12 with a game that has killer graphics.

Shipping it as a patch to people who already own the game doesn't do either of those things and will hardly sell more copies based just on a switch for DX11 to DX12. 

The only reason to implement after release would be if it can't be done in time nad/or as part of saleable package they can profit from with added features but that would almost certainly be a year or more after release. 

Those are the only logical choices for me and porting to DX12 for the full release seems most likely unless they simply cannot get it done in time, in which case selling it as an add on with more features rather than just DX12 patch makes the most sense.

 

16 hours ago, Mucker said:

in which case selling it as an add on with more features rather than just DX12 patch makes the most sense.

It would be such a bad move to add DX12 as a payable patch (even when including other features). I mean, imagine if all of a sudden all games required you to pay for performance improvements, that would be unheard of. Same with ray-tracing, it just gets added to the game in a patch. And seeing how they care for the community and how they understand the mistakes that were made in the past it would make no sense if they would ask money for a DX12 patch.

Edited October 28, 20196 yr by simtom

21 minutes ago, simtom said:

It would be such a bad move to add DX12 as a payable patch (even when including other features). I mean, imagine if all of a sudden all games required you to pay for performance improvements, that would be unheard of. Same with ray-tracing, it just gets added to the game in a patch. And seeing how they care for the community and how they understand the mistakes that were made in the past it would make no sense if they would ask money for a DX12 patch.

Many games have expansion packs or add on's with improvements and new content they believe are saleable and Microsoft Flight Simulator had the Acceleration expansion pack so there is history.

I just don't see it being patched in after its release and think it will be DX12 on release but if not an expansion pack a year or so alter sounds much more likely than a simple DX12 patch a few months down the line, not sure why people see that as an odd opinion or contentious in any way but we will have to wait and see what the reality is. 

I think we all agree it would be better to have DX12 at release? 

Edited October 28, 20196 yr by Mucker

2 minutes ago, Mucker said:

Many games have expansion packs or add on's with improvements and new content

I totally agree with that, the dreaded DLC content.

What I don't agree with is that those expansions should not include performance improvements. That would essentially be a big middle finger to all the people who don't want to buy or can't afford it. I feel like performance improvements are one of the basic things to give gamers (a basic right if you will).  

You could argue about the fact that LM did in fact ask money for the 64-bit upgrade but they did that in a smart way, they released the next version of P3D when many people expected them to release it. Other than that I don't know of any other game that tried to sell a DLC with performance improvements (even, like you say, when also including new content or features). 

Recent example is the 1.8 update of Kerbal Space Program. They upgraded the Unity version they were using to a more recent one (giving better performance) and it was released as a free update to everyone. Even when they added 64-bit support it was a free update.

That's just my opinion though!

18 minutes ago, Mucker said:

I think we all agree it would be better to have DX12 at release? 

No, I for one do not agree. MS/ASBO are aiming at the widest common denominator with regards to video cards. Knowing that the vast majority of potential users do not have DX12 capable video cards, it makes sense to limit MSFS to DX11

The fact that they have managed to replicate "Ray Tracing" programmatically with DX11 is an awesome breakthrough.