FSX without DX10 what will I miss

[Guest Hocking]

I guess after all of the enlightening posts (I know I learned a thing or two from reading them), my opinion is that I would not make any purchase decisions at this point centered around running FSX in a DX10 format. From basic observation, this whole DX10 mumbo-jumbo has taken gaming absolutely no where so far. There is not one DX10 game that has been released as of yet, and I think there is only one or two games that have been patched to DX10. As far as the games that have been patched to DX10, the reaction has been pretty "unexciting" to say the least. I can't remember what game actually received the DX10 patch, but I do remember the reviews talking about how the improvements weren't anything to get excited about at all.Perhaps games that are developed solely for DX10 will actually take advantage of all the things DX10 can offer, but games that are only "Patched" to DX10 will still be based on DX9 technology. So these games will still be DX9 games when you cut to the heart of the them. Nobody knows how FSX will turn out, but I am managing my own expectations at the moment and telling myself that FSX will not be dramatically different when it receives its DX10 patch. I think we have all learned to take what we hear with a grain of salt concerning FSX performance and what it will really offer us. I think you would be perfectly fine to just run FSX on a DX9 platform for the life of FSX, and then worry about getting DX10 hardware when the next flight simulator comes out (thinking about the next MSFS coming out is like hearing nails screeching down a chalkboard, oh what an experience these last 10 months have been). By that time, there will also be more "DX10 Only" games out.

[n4gix 4,947]

>I was merely trying to make the point that a>DX10-only aircraft would require an entire redesign of the>MSFS platform to communicate with DX10 (which is a program,>not a video card), something which would never be worthwile>just to improve the performance/graphics of an addon>minimally.I'm sorty that the main point I've tried to establish still seems to have been missed...There can never be such a thing as a "DX10-only aircraft." Period.And no, DX10 is not just "a program." It is that and more. There are three components to DX10: code in the operating system, the DX10 API layer, and DX10 hardware. All three must be present and operational before anything will happen. ;)The only reason for mentioning that there are many knowledgable folks her is simply to establish that it's pretty tough to buffalo anyone with buffalo cookies... :-wave

[n4gix 4,947]

>Yes, I can see how the whole Bill Leaming bold thing can be>quite overwhelming to a newbie. Don't let it put you off ->keep posting!Gary, never mistake my "bold statements" as anything other that passion for flightsimming and a desire to pass along accurate information...:-beerchug

[Max Kraus 339]

If you never have DX10 you won't miss anything. I don't miss the jet set life style because I've never had 200 million dollars.

[Guest fruitfly]

Hi!I didn't understand anything. This is how I see it: In every computer there are many many tiny 1's and 0's and when they get mixed up, one needs to defragment.There!*:-* http://www.americanpatrol.com/_icons/BS_No.gif

[Guest]

>From basic observation, this>whole DX10 mumbo-jumbo has taken gaming absolutely no where so>far. You are right. So far DX10 is VERY disappointing... I sort of had to buy a new computer at the beginning of this year. So I did and I went for Vista and the 8800GTX, in order to be ready for DX10. Almost half a year further down the road I still haven't had any real use of them... I've tried one DX10 demo (Lost planet) with was BAD (meaning SLOW and sloppy) and that's it. I really expected to see more DX10 stuff after Vista was released. Yes, I am VERY disappointed!At the same time......this hardware is MORE than capable of playing DX9 games. ;) The only thing that I do not like is Vista when it comes to games: I believe XP is the better gameplatform at the moment. Vista gives problems or just lower fps than XP does. But compared to my old rig I can play every game there is without problems, so... in the end I am happy with my purchase. Specially because I needed a new computer. But maybe I should have gone for XP and wait with Vista until DX10 really became usefull.If I had bought my computer ONLY for DX10 compatibility I would be very annoyed by now...!BTW Someone said DX10 will give better performance than DX9. But I wouldn't count on that. The thing is that every developer will use the new possibilities DX10 offers. If they would ONLY use the possibilities DX9 already offers, fps would indeed go up a lot, but I'm sure the new DX10 features will be used too, which means that in the end, due to all the extra possibilities, fps will go DOWN compared to DX9 games. Look at Company of Heroes. The DX10 patch (the only DX10 patch up to now!) gives you LOWER fps due to all the DX10 enhancements (specially lightning effects and extra objects). I really do NOT expect higher fps with the FSX DX10 patch. I expect better visuals thanks to the DX10 enhancements, but you won't get them for free. If they manage to get close to the (so called) screenshots they released last year (which I doubt VERY much), that HAS to mean low fps, at least on current DX10 hardware. You really won't get those beatifull waves without any loss in fps...! But as I said, I really don't believe they will get even NEAR those DX10-Photoshop-artists impressions... not even CLOSE... They might come a LITTLE bit closer if they write the new FS completely for DX10 only...!BTW If my expectations are right and Aces/MS won't indeed manage to give us what they promised (that's how I see it) with those artists impressions, I will feel VERY tricked, conned, cheated, etc. I already am quite disappointed it's taking them so long to deliver the goods. After all, we were told Aces were trying hard to have the DX10-patch ready at the time of Windows Vista launch!!! I based my DX10-purchases on information like this:http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1989809,00.asp...and now we know this is nothing but ********! Come to think of it, we ARE already cheated...! Carl Edlund gives the impression they were already REALLY working on DX10 for FSX, while now we know, thanks to Phil Taylor, there was just one man working on it and they just started getting serious about it AFTER SP1. All in all the DX10 patch will comes AT LEAST 10 months later than promised. Hm, I'm getting more and more ###### here, so I'd better stop and enjoy what I've got. :( I mean, I AM enjoying FSX right now... ;)

[Guest allcott]

To answer the original question:Not much.Need proof?Download this:http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_ptboats_videos.htmlA side-by-side comparison of a game similar in concept to FS, needing many of the same attributes for DX10 graphics. In 110 megs of download of a frame-by-frame, side-by-side comparison, I can see about six seconds of difference, and absoutely nothing in terms of enhanced gameplay, save for a few splashes. Can YOU see a difference? I can, just, but it wasn't worth 110 megs of donwload, much less

[Guest]

Thx for the link to the movie: didn't know about that one. But er... you might need to get your eyes examined...! I can see lot's of differenced! The texture on the boat, the AWESOME soft particles (imagine having fog looking that soft in FSX!), the reflection on the water, it's a LOT better. If you can only see 6 seconds of difference, you need glasses or a new monitor. ;)

[Guest Hocking]

I watched the movie, and I must agree with Alcott. It just isn't that "breath taking" of an improvement. Is it nicer? Yes. Does it look good? Yes. Would you go buy Vista and a DX10 card to have it? No. Sorry, it just doesn't improve the visuals by a wide enough margin to make me excited. DX9 is fine by my standards for now.Besides, those visuals would be old after you play the game for a day. Visuals are not worth 1 FPS in my opinion, so I will stick with DX9 for now. Microsoft is becoming extremely vulnerable at this point with their "DX10/Vista" disaster. Most people would argue that Microsoft has sold millions of copies so far, so Vista is not a disaster at all. Well, this is why Microsoft is so vulnerable at the moment, because they have sold millions of copies. It will be the Vista experience that drives people into considering other Operating Systems in the future.

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Bill, I don't take them to heart, but put yourselve in the shoes of a newbie. But then again, if they get involved in an emotive topic ...Gary

[BobP 56]

IMHO the difference is not worth $1500 to $3500 which is the cost of a new system. In fact the developer appears to be grasping at straws to pedal DX10. (i.e. drawing circles around the differences to ensure the reader sees them.) The ONLY issue that will move me to buy a new a system with Vista and DX10 is performance. The step change in FSX visuals and features needs to be matched with a performance increase. And the terrible performance of FSX out of the box has amplified the need. I have little interest in FSX if visual quality trumps performance and usability. FSX was released woefully out of balance relative to the two and DX10 will need to demonstrate a performance increase.In answer to the OP's question; it is too early to know what will be missed, but it had better include performance enhancements.:)Bob...

[Guest]

>The step change in FSX visuals and features needs to be>matched with a performance increase. And the terrible>performance of FSX out of the box has amplified the need. I>have little interest in FSX if visual quality trumps>performance and usability. FSX was released woefully out of>balance relative to the two and DX10 will need to demonstrate>a performance increase.That's why I hope we will be able to tweak the DX10 stuff! For instance that we can choose to enable certain visual enhancements or not, in which 'not' means we will be able to only benefit of the performance increase thet DX10 MUST deliver, if you take out certain visual enhancements. If this tweakability is not there I am afraid fps will be even worse than without the DX10 patch (like with Company of Heroes). And if the DX10 patch can not deliver ANY performance increase, even with visual enhancements off, well... then MS will be in big trouble... They have a promise to keep!

[jfri 42]

>I'm sitting here scratching my head and wondering, just what>"add-on" could possibly be made "DX10 only?">>FSX is what will use DX10 (if available), not any add-on! *:-*>My impression is that DX10 will introduce new graphical features. Could not an addon use this new features? And in such a case could not a DX9 only system give problems? If I would use an older DX version than DX9 will I not have problems with both FSX and FS9?

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>I would like to formally withdraw my comment seeing as how>everybody disagrees with me, and I have been out of contact>with this friend for nearly six months.>> ...>>ChrisNo problem. Welcome to the forums. We kind of got a little jumpy because this topic was just beaten to death. So your OP was bad timing.I thought with the timing it might have been troll bait--I was wrong. Sorry about that. Sometimes someone will post something directly contrary to the general consensus of a week-long, 50-100 message thread just to get another mind numbing 100 message thread/flame war going.We try for as little noise and as much information and healthy speculation and debate as possible with some needling here and there (and dare I say sarcasm). Welcome to the conversation.

[Murmur 3,941]

>Download this:>http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_ptboats_videos.html>>A side-by-side comparison of a game similar in concept to FS,>needing many of the same attributes for DX10 graphics. Great video. The funny thing is, I prefer the DX9 rendering in several scenes over DX10!Marco