Daztek posted:

quote:

quote:
64 bit was required to make the large world map, DX12 is mostly about optimization and performance gains, so there is no need to delay major parts of the game to implement it. Rather tasks will be optimized in the background to take advantage of it, but DX12 is not even required to play SC, so I wouldn't expect it to halt development in anyway that a core system like the 64-bit conversion would. And even then 64-bit did not halt development. Design work on Space station, ships, and planetside locations continued while it was being developed. Then those assets were simply rolled into it when it came online.

Don't worry, everything is fine!

EminusSleepus posted:

gently caress you! if you are a programmer it is easier said than done

AP posted:

I think the immediate danger of them going bust in 2016 has passed, they raised ~$1 million in 48 hours over the weekend, 3 years after the kickstarter. I always thought their target in this sale was 5.6 million or whatever it was they needed to make 100 million, they are going to be within 500k of that target later today. November 2015 isn't going to beat Nov 2014 or 2013 but any other crowdfunded company in the world could only dream about those figures, if they're not incredibly stupid with the money I don't see any reason they can't make it until Games Com 2016, then Citizen Con 2016 and then yet another November sale.

I wonder who is going to leave over Christmas though and if they lose some of the Crytek dudes in Germany that's going to hurt.

Octopode posted:

Microsoft provides an abstraction layer that allows you to create a D3D11to12 resource that will handle the vast majority of translation between the two implementations at the driver level, at the cost of additional memory and CPU overhead, which can be used as a fairly easy to implement stopgap during the transition from 11 to 12. It lets you transition pieces of the rendering engine piecemeal while the rest keep functioning, or use a blended approach of DX12 and DX11 code. It does require some limited rewriting, due to DX12's replacement of some higher level functions with lower level shader manipulations, but for the most part, it's exactly what Chris was describing in the original quote. You don't get most of the fancy new performance features of 12 until you implement them properly and stop using the old DX11 functions, but it's not that difficult of a task to get a DX11 render engine up and working on DX12.

D_Smart posted:

The money they made in Oct-Nov is barely enough to fund ops through Q1/16. There is a reason why the current (and soon to be changed) ToS was extended six more months (to May 2016) before accountability becomes an issue.

They're not going to sustain four dev studios for long if they are pulling in less than $3m per month.

I still don't believe the project will survive 2016.

TTerrible posted:

How do people have any confidence in CIG re-architecting the rendering code of the engine to use DX12?

* They've only managed the (alleged) 64bit switch three years in.

* They've already tried to merge two codebases and that resulted in them throwing away an entire fps game.

* For both of the above fiascos they had CryTek devs in house.

Now they want to change over to an entirely new low level API on a totally bastardised engine that is causing problems for devs poached from the original developer, again, three years in.

This is absolutely mind numbingly stupid.

quote:

Crazy_Falco: @Xariez that's not anywhere near normal, beta servers are lagging hard, randomly
Reluctantfr0gBioGenx2b: Ah, ok thanks, wasn't sure
ElementalStorm23: @Badnewsbaron, oh did you ever get my message on Discord?
Pbourey75: Rollback
BioGenx2b: But they need DX12 to get the kind of performance the game demands.
Stephen95s: dat loading lol
Reluctantfr0g: true
D_I_S_C_I_P_L_E: even if sc push back 8 months for dx12 it would be worth it
Xariez: It takes like, 5-10 times longer than that for me @Crazy_falco
vlaskovitz: how about 64 bit client, any news?
Mordelm: DX12 will be optional, has to be. So they'll use that to add more optional graphical stuff.

MrBadidea posted:

Octopode posted:

Unless CIG has changed the handling from the base engine, CryEngine does not rely on the D3D shader interfaces, it has its own implementation of a specialized shader system that's not quite the same as the HLSL system used by D3D11, so that's not really an issue.

As for the speed: not optimized and not recommended are not the same thing as not possible, and as I said, it's a stopgap solution to allow for piecemeal implementation jus to get things running on DX12, not a long-term solution for the shipping game. They'll likely implement a side-by-side solution for that, similar to what happened with the DX9/11 transition for most games at the time, since I doubt they're going to make the game DX12 required, and they'll leave the current DX11 implementation as the only one available to players until they're able to rewrite enough of the DX12 implementation to make it playable.

Octopode posted:

quote:

I think once they get their DX12 implementation in and see just how much more they can do with it they'll make it required.
I'm imagining a Letter from CR mid 2016 with a cool video showing just how many more things can happen at once with DX12, and how they're making the decision to require it because the overall experience will be so much better.

Octopode posted:

Unless CIG has changed the handling from the base engine, CryEngine does not rely on the D3D shader interfaces, it has its own implementation of a specialized shader system that's not quite the same as the HLSL system used by D3D11, so that's not really an issue.

As for the speed: not optimized and not recommended are not the same thing as not possible, and as I said, it's a stopgap solution to allow for piecemeal implementation jus to get things running on DX12, not a long-term solution for the shipping game. They'll likely implement a side-by-side solution for that, similar to what happened with the DX9/11 transition for most games at the time, since I doubt they're going to make the game DX12 required, and they'll leave the current DX11 implementation as the only one available to players until they're able to rewrite enough of the DX12 implementation to make it playable.

D_Smart posted:

The money they made in Oct-Nov is barely enough to fund ops through Q1/16. There is a reason why the current (and soon to be changed) ToS was extended six more months (to May 2016) before accountability becomes an issue.

They're not going to sustain four dev studios for long if they are pulling in less than $3m per month.

I still don't believe the project will survive 2016.

D_Smart posted:

No. GTFO. That's not how that works. Jesus H. Christ, dude. Seriously. Stop.

revmoo posted:

Stop acting like you know more than he does. What do you think you're some sort of video game developer or something? Sheesh.

Octopode posted:

I'm sure he'll get that nasty alt-tab functionality figured out one of these days.

Dunite posted:

At this point I development in SC, even if the company goes belly up, someone, Bootcha, needs to step in and buy the rotting husk of the game.

I'm sure by the time this happens, all of the resources in game will be able to be cobbled together in a ghetto buggy 3D Space Station 13.

Octopode posted:

I'm sure he'll get that nasty alt-tab functionality figured out one of these days.

Iglocska posted:

To be fair I am not sure how much of that was integration on an engine level. Illfonic probably just left them with an FPS component that was completely unrealistic and primitive, without any of the high-tech head-bobbing that everyone craves.

neonbregna posted:

How much have you given your lord and savior Christ Roberts?

Octopode posted:

Unless CIG has changed the handling from the base engine, CryEngine does not rely on the D3D shader interfaces, it has its own implementation of a specialized shader system that's not quite the same as the HLSL system used by D3D11, so that's not really an issue.

As for the speed: not optimized and not recommended are not the same thing as not possible, and as I said, it's a stopgap solution to allow for piecemeal implementation jus to get things running on DX12, not a long-term solution for the shipping game. They'll likely implement a side-by-side solution for that, similar to what happened with the DX9/11 transition for most games at the time, since I doubt they're going to make the game DX12 required, and they'll leave the current DX11 implementation as the only one available to players until they're able to rewrite enough of the DX12 implementation to make it playable.

Octopode posted:

I'm sure he'll get that nasty alt-tab functionality figured out one of these days.

Dapper Dan posted:

Even if you are right, how can you defend doing something that benefits relatively few and costs more time and money when they have only released a pre-alpha proof of concept and absolutely nothing from the single player portion that is coming in a year?

Not to mention all the growing pains with a new architecture and unforseen problems.

Beet Wagon posted:

I think gruyere is a pretty good cheese, though.