Cyberpunk 2077 a DX12-Only Release on PC

[delshay]

The game looks like a cheap GTA clone with Watchdogs mechanics and some Deus Ex stuff in all wrong ways, and has the RGB overload into everything in the game universe. And it doesn't have a DX11 version, what a shame. Not even Vulkan, DOOM Eternal runs super fast on Vulkan and this POS game doesn't have it and then they brag about DRM free and what not. Anyways CDPR has been pandering heavily to politics and their Internal Ethics dept is at PR work as well, not the old CDPR which made TW3 imho.

I have even more bad news, Doom Eternal does not work on the 939 platform. This information will appear in 939 adventure thread at some point.

 

[ZoneDymo]

That's a lot of damage

No, what that is is a lack of reading comprehension....

@Recon joked about wanting DX8 (which is very old) because the article is about the game being DX12 only, as if this being DX12 only would be some issue.
@Caring then reacted to the article in general stating that DX12 only is not problem (in this day and age)
Then @Recon having just posted the previous joke doubled on it by making the same joke again as a reaction.
@Luxluther then misinterpreted the line "there is no DX8" as if @Recon claimed DX8 does not exist instead of the comment's intention of Cyberpunk not supporting it.
@Recon then seemingly did not understand @Luxluther's comment and reacted to it as if @Luxluther said that the game does support DX8 with the "yes there is" part and reacted saying @luxluther would have no way of knowing this yet as the game is not out.

phew...all I can say people is, take your time and read before reacting sometimes.

 

[efikkan]

A question, of course, could be asked regarding how some games' DX11 API actually delivers increased performance over the DX12 version. But with the game being originally developed with DX12 in mind, we'll have to believe it's the best version it could be.

The explanation is pretty simple;
In order to support multiple APIs, the developers have two options, either create multiple render paths (for everything), or create an abstraction layer which unifies the APIs while adding overhead. Pretty much all DirectX 12 games so far chose the latter, partially because most use generic off the shelf game engines so they don't code anything low level anyway, and also because most programmers these days loves layering abstractions. So in essence, "all" DirectX 12 games to date are built to simulate DirectX 11, which means sub-optimal render queues etc.

This is essentially the same problem Crysis had back in the days; A DirectX 10 game built in the "DirectX 9 way", so it performed better with DirectX 9.

DirectX 12 is widespread enough that we should be able to do it exclusively, and build the engine around it. And my opinion is that it's better to do one API right, than to do two APIs wrong.

I do, there is no DX8.

Huh?
Everyone knows the cool guys use Glide

 

[Xuper]

So 390X/Fury will be faster Maxwell?

 

[medi01]

A question, of course, could be asked regarding how some games' DX11 API actually delivers increased performance over the DX12 version.

Mostly on cards of a certain manufacturer, that is, chuckle.

 

[Tom Yum]

It will be interesting to see how it performs on PS5 given it doesn't have DX12 (but would implement a similar but different Sony graphics API like GNM). That to me would imply the developer will write an abstraction layer to convert DX12 graphics calls to GNM, instead of supporting separate code paths within the engine itself for either API.

 

[Valantar]

The explanation is pretty simple;
In order to support multiple APIs, the developers have two options, either create multiple render paths (for everything), or create an abstraction layer which unifies the APIs while adding overhead. Pretty much all DirectX 12 games so far chose the latter, partially because most use generic off the shelf game engines so they don't code anything low level anyway, and also because most programmers these days loves layering abstractions. So in essence, "all" DirectX 12 games to date are built to simulate DirectX 11, which means sub-optimal render queues etc.

This is essentially the same problem Crysis had back in the days; A DirectX 10 game built in the "DirectX 9 way", so it performed better with DirectX 9.

DirectX 12 is widespread enough that we should be able to do it exclusively, and build the engine around it. And my opinion is that it's better to do one API right, than to do two APIs wrong.


Huh?
Everyone knows the cool guys use Glide

Mostly on cards of a certain manufacturer, that is, chuckle.

Isn't this also at least partly down to developers' knowledge of and familiarity with coding for a given API? Most developers don't exactly get a lot of dedicated time to study the ins and outs of a new API when working on a project, so familiarity and experience inevitably goes hand in hand with delivering good results. If a developer has been working in games since the mid-2000s they likely started out on DX10, gradually moved to DX11 (which reportedly is rather similar) after it launched in 2008, and then at best started on the much bigger job of getting to know DX12 back in 2015 - after a long period of getting well versed in DX11. Given the prevalence of DX11 hardware, continuing software support, and increasing scope and complexity of game development over the past decade (more work to do in the same time) there is nothing surprising about the transition from DX11 to DX12 taking longer than previous ones.

The existence of translation layers like those described above would also serve to lengthen this transition as they would effectively hinder developers from getting to know the new API properly.

It will be interesting to see how it performs on PS5 given it doesn't have DX12 (but would implement a similar but different Sony graphics API like GNM). That to me would imply the developer will write an abstraction layer to convert DX12 graphics calls to GNM, instead of supporting separate code paths within the engine itself for either API.

Either that, or this was a choice of choosing two APIs (DX12 and Sony's) rather than three. Either way it's a more efficient use of resources, and about damn time!

 

[efikkan]

Isn't this also at least partly down to developers' knowledge of and familiarity with coding for a given API?
<snip>
Given the prevalence of DX11 hardware, continuing software support, and increasing scope and complexity of game development over the past decade (more work to do in the same time) there is nothing surprising about the transition from DX11 to DX12 taking longer than previous ones.

Sure, developers' familiarity with APIs is certainly a concern.
Also, project management often like to be able to make last minute decisions, like choose a new platform late in the development process. Such decisions never lead to good code or bug free games though.

But I think this is more due to the development philosophy today about abstracting away all the hard/dirty stuff to make development "easier". But this is really a fallacy. While there isn't principally anything wrong in writing light abstractions to make things cleaner, abstractions that hide what's actually going on is ultimately a fool's errand, which leads to code which is hard to reason about, debug and maintain. If you want to abstract something because (some of) your team members are not skilled enough to deal with it, then train them or replace them. Programmers who don't understand what they're working with are bound to write horrendous code, no matter how hard they try. I've seen countless examples of where "experienced" developers write spectacularly bad code only because they don't understand what's going on underneath. This principle is not limited to graphics APIs, but all development.

The existence of translation layers like those described above would also serve to lengthen this transition as they would effectively hinder developers from getting to know the new API properly.

Absolutely.
I would go so far as claiming it should only be a last resort, like when your requirements changes too late to rewrite something properly (which is never a good thing, BTW).

The earlier you kick off those training wheels, the better.

 

[HD64G]

A good choice to make the game only DX12 as in the games that were DX11 originally and the new API came later, it didn't make it faster in most cases. I'd prefer Vulkan for sure but they went DX12 due to the console supporting and the Ray tracing thing. A great move they also support the Win7 imho. Most sales for them.

 

[Valantar]

Sure, developers' familiarity with APIs is certainly a concern.
Also, project management often like to be able to make last minute decisions, like choose a new platform late in the development process. Such decisions never lead to good code or bug free games though.

But I think this is more due to the development philosophy today about abstracting away all the hard/dirty stuff to make development "easier". But this is really a fallacy. While there isn't principally anything wrong in writing light abstractions to make things cleaner, abstractions that hide what's actually going on is ultimately a fool's errand, which leads to code which is hard to reason about, debug and maintain. If you want to abstract something because (some of) your team members are not skilled enough to deal with it, then train them or replace them. Programmers who don't understand what they're working with are bound to write horrendous code, no matter how hard they try. I've seen countless examples of where "experienced" developers write spectacularly bad code only because they don't understand what's going on underneath. This principle is not limited to graphics APIs, but all development.


Absolutely.
I would go so far as claiming it should only be a last resort, like when your requirements changes too late to rewrite something properly (which is never a good thing, BTW).

The earlier you kick off those training wheels, the better.

Yeah, it's definitely not hard to see stuff like this go into a negative spiral pretty fast. New API is complex and different from the previous one, so rather than retraining the whole development team a small team is set aside to make a translation layer while the rest continue working in the old API. Inevitably translation is buggy, forcing more resources to be put into fixing bugs in the translation layer before any move to retraining. Performance in the previous API is also in all likelihood better simply due to being native code and developers being more familiar with it. Then add launch-date and profit-fixated publishers dictating how much time a developer has to make the game, and even further shortcuts are added, plus you get crunch which removes the possibility of developers learning new APIs in their free time (which IMO shouldn't ever be necessary, but never mind that). You are left with a rushed game full of bugs, where the majority are (surprise!) in the version with the newer API, making users think the new API sucks, which again makes the publisher reluctant to allow a wholesale transition to developing in the new API ... etc, etc. There are a lot of places where a cycle like this could be broken, but that takes management with the ability to look beyond the closest deadline and plan long-term. Which seems like a rare quality in the games industry currently. Even if it took five years(!) it's great that CDPR are doing this.

 

[efikkan]

Performance in the previous API is also in all likelihood better simply due to being native code and developers being more familiar with it.

Even moreso, the abstractions are probably mimicking the old API, so the old one works more optimal than the new one. E.g. DirectX 11 works better because your abstractions translate to more optimal DirectX 11 than DirectX 12 code.

Developers can choose to do their abstractions at different levels, even multiple levels is fairly common. The lower these abstractions are, the less you are able to take full potential of the underlying graphics API. The higher the abstractions are, the more you are able to tailor the code for the graphics API; render more optimally, batch things, use more unique features, etc.

Taken to the extreme, you can for instance abstract the graphics API at the lowest level possible, then add another layer (or multiple) for basic primitives (textures, vertex buffers, meshes, etc.), and then another for entities (e.g. terrain, player, ingame pickups etc.). In this example, only the lowest layer will use the graphics API directly, while most of the codebase is API agnostic. The advantage of this is greater portability (in theory), but the disadvantage is the massive overhead, difficulty debugging, difficulty achieving advanced rendering techniques, lack of features (as you are probably restricted to the common denominator between your APIs), and in reality all the workarounds that you will end up making all over the code base.

 

[Easo]

I am sure we can live over this...

 

[Antykain]

More and more game releases are going to be this way, I'm sure.. being DX12-only. Which I am good with. I know not everyone is going to like it, but it's going to happen sooner or later anyway. Maybe down the road 2077 will support Vulkan..

 

[lexluthermiester]

Anyone with a Windows machine should have 10 installed by now, regardless of build versions. Why cater to Windows 7 that no longer have support? It feels like a waste of time IMO.
That said, folks who hated the game for no reason probably think it's easy to make a game that doesn't feel cheesy, generic or "just another GTA clone".

I have to agree on the point of 'why support Windows 7?'. It's an old OS and it's time to move on.

Some people hate Windows 10 with an absolute passion and refuse to switch. CDPR has chosen not to ignore that sector of buyers. What do you care?

You didn't see games that came out in 2015 still supporting Windows XP.

Actually, that's not true. There are plenty of new games that STILL support WinXP.

I don't see how you can expect new releases to cater to (a very small minority of) people that are just not willing to get with the times.

23% is not a "very small minority"(that's the percentage of users still on Windows 7, currently).

 

[kayjay010101]

Some people hate Windows 10 with an absolute passion and refuse to switch. CDPR has chosen not to ignore that sector of buyers. What do you care?

I care because Windows 10-only features, like a lot of DX12, are not being supported because devs still support Windows 7. I'll give you an example:
Halo Reach on PC had audio issues specifically because Windows 7 had an older version of XAudio, v2.7, which had transition and volume problems. Only recently has there been an update from Microsoft on Win7 for XAudio, but that game has been plagued with audio problems because of this for almost a year. Had they axed Win7 support, it would have launched without that problem.
And the people who hate it with a passion can suck it up and either upgrade and be supported or stay on legacy software and be left behind. They're not entitled to continued support for new games when the OS has exited extended support, period.

Actually, that's not true. There are plenty of new games that STILL support WinXP.

I specifically meant games that are on the scale of this game. AAA games. TW3, which is the perfect example as it was made by the same company in 2015, didn't support XP.

23% is not a "very small minority"(that's the percentage of users still on Windows 7, currently).

And of that subsection of users, how many are in the demographic to actually buy this game? I'm guessing it's mostly computers that cannot be upgraded for development reasons, as crucial programs that a company/user relies on has not been updated. That's why I said minority.

 

[efikkan]

And of that subsection of users, how many are in the demographic to actually buy this game? I'm guessing it's mostly computers that cannot be upgraded for development reasons, as crucial programs that a company/user relies on has not been updated. That's why I said minority.

I don't know the specifics for this game's user base, but I do believe there is a significant user base of gamers on Windows 7 in China. That might be a lot of potential revenue for some games.

While I appreciate that some might want to hold on to their OS for a bit more, everyone understands that we're approaching the end of Windows 7 support for new games. We're already at the point where it's extra effort to support it for DirectX 12, and very soon developers will be faced with the tough decision to drop features or drop support. We also have to remember that most games are "maintained" for up to several years after launch. Launching with Windows 7 support and then dropping it, would not be popular either.

Vulkan based games will be in a better position for now, those shouldn't require much extra effort to support Windows 7, and for the time being Nvidia and AMD still offers driver support.

But if a user wants freedom, then there is always team penguin…

 

[Vayra86]

Hey when it comes Windows support, MS will dictate the pace and not you. This has been clarified over and over by the company itself. They've changed and extended support dates and they've made decisions to continue supporting DX versions etc.

Its just a market like everything else and for MS it is also their user base. They'll nudge you in the right direction and when you're beyond saving (if you still say 'XP is great in 2020' for example), its your own problem isn't it... Same goes for game support. If you're not on 10, don't be surprised it won't work going forward. Usually though product support extends long beyond official OS support. If you want to keep legacy systems at some point its just a good idea to freeze things and stop adding new stuff, after all, nobody is coding for your specific config anymore.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I care because Windows 10-only features, like a lot of DX12, are not being supported because devs still support Windows 7. I'll give you an example:
Halo Reach on PC had audio issues specifically because Windows 7 had an older version of XAudio, v2.7, which had transition and volume problems. Only recently has there been an update from Microsoft on Win7 for XAudio, but that game has been plagued with audio problems because of this for almost a year. Had they axed Win7 support, it would have launched without that problem.

That was a limited problem that affected a very few. It had less to do with Windows 7 and the version of XAudio as it did the fact that it(the game) wasn't properly tested to begin with.

And the people who hate it with a passion can suck it up and either upgrade and be supported or stay on legacy software and be left behind. They're not entitled to continued support for new games when the OS has exited extended support, period.

Your understanding of how Operating Systems exist in the world needs improvement.
First, you do not have the right to dictate terms to anyone other than yourself. Kindly stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Second, whether or not a "person" is "entitled" to continued software support has little to do with whether or not the OS maker continues support for the OS themselves. Many versions of Windows have continued to receive new versions of software and games because the platform was/is popular regardless of whether or not Microsoft supports it.
Third, just because someone like yourself fails to understand the reality at play in the world doesn't change the world at all. Software and game devs will continue to support Windows 7 until THEY decide it is no longer worth their time & money. And so long as 20%+ of the planet continues to use the OS it will remain a popular platform devs chose to support.

I'm guessing

Exactly. CDPR isn't. If they are continuing to support Windows 7, it's because their market analysation team ran the numbers and decided that the money is there, enough to justify the effort.

 

[kayjay010101]

That was limited problem that affected a very few. It had less to do with Windows 7 and the version of XAudio as it did the fact that it(the game) wasn't properly tested to begin with.

That's just wrong all round. 343 has said it's because of Win7 only having XAudio 2.7 at the time. Win10 had support for a newer version XAudio that would have been used, preventing the issues, but Win7 held it back to 2.7. And it was a widely known issue that affected a lot of people.

Your understanding of how Operating Systems exist in the world needs improvement.
First, you do not have the right to dictate terms to anyone other than yourself. Kindly stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

I am not dictating any terms. I am just giving my opinion. My opinion is that people shouldn't expect to see their platform supported if that platform is now considered legacy. And it is my opinion that once something old holds you back, you cut it loose.

Second, whether or not a "person" is "entitled" to continued software support has little to do with whether or not the OS maker continues support for the OS themselves. Many versions of Windows have continued to receive new versions of software and games because the platform was/is popular regardless of whether or not Microsoft supports it.

You're mixing my definition of entitlement with expectation. If a platform is old but popular, you can expect devs to support it. It still means they could axe it at any time and it would be 100% justified, unlike if they axed support for an OS currently supported in the mainstream. That's what I mean by entitlement. If you're on an old platform, you're not entitled to new stuff. You can expect it if there's a market for developing for it, but you're not entitled to it.

Third, just because someone like yourself fails to understand the reality at play in the world doesn't change the world at all. Software and game devs will continue to support Windows 7 until THEY decide it is no longer worth their time & money. And so long as 20%+ of the planet continues to use the OS it will remain a popular platform devs chose to support.

Exactly. CDPR isn't. If they are continuing to support Windows 7, it's because their market analysation team ran the numbers and decided that the money is there, enough to justify the effort.

Again, it is my opinion that doing so is foolish since it hinders features that could otherwise be present. I'd personally, and I understand why CDPR made the decision not to, axe Win7 and offers better features that only Win10 can provide, as stated.

 

[Valantar]

Just to jump in here, there is absolutely no denying that maintaining sub-par features from old operating systems that have been superseded by newer solutions as the default simply because there is still a user base for the old OS is a major issue in software development. One thing is maintaining (optional/on-demand) layers of backwards compatibility, making the old solution the default to appease a minority of hold-outs is another thing entirely. Sadly, due to limited developmental resources and time, supporting an old standard often means that is the only standard supported and anything newer and better gets bypassed entirely.

I would be willing to bet the proportion of enthusiasts sticking to W7 for ideological reasons is a tiny proportion of the remaining W7 user base, with the rest consisting of either systems that can't be upgraded for some reason and the proverbial grandparents' PC that hasn't been upgraded because the user neither understands how nor why to do it themselves, are unwilling to pay for help, and those around them don't have the time.

 

[rtwjunkie]

The game looks like a cheap GTA clone with Watchdogs mechanics and some Deus Ex stuff in all wrong ways, and has the RGB overload into everything in the game universe. And it doesn't have a DX11 version, what a shame. Not even Vulkan, DOOM Eternal runs super fast on Vulkan and this POS game doesn't have it and then they brag about DRM free and what not. Anyways CDPR has been pandering heavily to politics and their Internal Ethics dept is at PR work as well, not the old CDPR which made TW3 imho.

Stop with the cheap GTA clone and special interests crap. You keep saying this in any thread remotely connected to Cyberpunk 2077. It’s like you have some oersonal crusade that only helps your inner troll self, because no one is biting. Save yourself the personal aggravation that only you seem to feel and just bypass the Cyberpunk articles. You’re not convincing anyone with your crusade on this or the supposed pandering to special interests you accuse them of.

 

[Ashtr1x]

Stop with the cheap GTA clone and special interests crap. You keep saying this in any thread remotely connected to Cyberpunk 2077. It’s like you have some oersonal crusade that only helps your inner troll self, because no one is biting. Save yourself the personal aggravation that only you seem to feel and just bypass the Cyberpunk articles. You’re not convincing anyone with your crusade on this or the supposed pandering to special interests you accuse them of.

LOL. Any negative part on CDPR you pounce. The game looks like a GTA clone and all fancy crap shoved into. The buildings have LED ads that's it, comparing with any old Anime or even Matrix machine cities, or any Sci Fi game this doesn't hold a candle, they even removed wall running, there are no super giant structures in the game, it just feels all GTA with some RGB skin on it esp that combat and the guns with all the generic style, and that's my view on this, who are you to enforce or block ? Save your personal feeling with silly meltdown on a random internet comment and move on.

 

[rtwjunkie]

LOL. Any negative part on CDPR you pounce. The game looks like a GTA clone and all fancy crap shoved into. The buildings have LED ads that's it, comparing with any old Anime or even Matrix machine cities, or any Sci Fi game this doesn't hold a candle, they even removed wall running, there are no super giant structures in the game, it just feels all GTA with some RGB skin on it esp that combat and the guns with all the generic style, and that's my view on this, who are you to enforce or block ? Save your personal feeling with silly meltdown on a random internet comment and move on.

Wrong on two counts: no meltdown on my part. Everyone here knows I call BS when I see it. And also wrong in that you aren’t making a “random internet comment.” Anyone here can go to any Cyberpunk 2077 item in these forums in the last couple weeks and see you writing your by now tired old script. That’s hardly random. It’s a deliberate campaign against it. THAT’s why I notice because even your deliberate campaign is factually incorrect in it’s constant assertions.

 

[Valantar]

LOL. Any negative part on CDPR you pounce. The game looks like a GTA clone and all fancy crap shoved into. The buildings have LED ads that's it, comparing with any old Anime or even Matrix machine cities, or any Sci Fi game this doesn't hold a candle, they even removed wall running, there are no super giant structures in the game, it just feels all GTA with some RGB skin on it esp that combat and the guns with all the generic style, and that's my view on this, who are you to enforce or block ? Save your personal feeling with silly meltdown on a random internet comment and move on.

Wait, so you have played the game? If not, maybe stop making those kinds of assertions? And, even if this is "just your opinion", can you explain why it's somehow wrong for this game to not have "super giant structures" or wall running? Wall running doesn't mesh well with a gritty cyberpunk world (it's a tad too sci-fi, and skews too action-oriented for the noir roots of the genre), and while i agree that giant structures are a part of the aestethic (Blade Runner features quite a few, etc.), it's not like we've seen even close to the whole of Night City nor its surroundings. Also, given the clear gameplay and gameworld differences, why is this a GTA clone? Are all open world games set in a city with driving and some kind of plot relation to organized crime GTA clones? To make a statement like that you actually need to back it up with something. It's okay if you don't like "RGB" (though neon has been a huge part of the style of the cyberpunk genre since its inception), but why go around posting useless garbage like that? If you have genuine things you dislike about it, why not be open to discussing them rather than just throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated stuff out there?

 

[Ashtr1x]

Wait, so you have played the game? If not, maybe stop making those kinds of assertions? And, even if this is "just your opinion", can you explain why it's somehow wrong for this game to not have "super giant structures" or wall running? Wall running doesn't mesh well with a gritty cyberpunk world (it's a tad too sci-fi, and skews too action-oriented for the noir roots of the genre), and while i agree that giant structures are a part of the aestethic (Blade Runner features quite a few, etc.), it's not like we've seen even close to the whole of Night City nor its surroundings. Also, given the clear gameplay and gameworld differences, why is this a GTA clone? Are all open world games set in a city with driving and some kind of plot relation to organized crime GTA clones? To make a statement like that you actually need to back it up with something. It's okay if you don't like "RGB" (though neon has been a huge part of the style of the cyberpunk genre since its inception), but why go around posting useless garbage like that? If you have genuine things you dislike about it, why not be open to discussing them rather than just throwing a bunch of unsubstantiated stuff out there?

Yea no one played so no one can say anything huh, CDPR did add that and they removed it for "design reasons" and I just mentioned that part and whenever they show game, always says "NOT FINAL" and constantly changing so how do you think about this game other than assertions from what they showed ? And next, this game RGB - Neon has been in the retrowave music or synthwave which is again not a part of this game. "huge part of the Cyberpunk genre since it's inception" just like 80s cyberpunk anime like Neo Tokyo or Metropolis or Ergo Proxy or Ghost in the Shell or the games such as Hard Reset, Deus Ex series ? or the Halo series it's also highly sci fi and futuristic, Titanfall, MGS as well although latter are more of a Military Sci Fi Mecha. What is garbage here huh, and what is the "substantial evidence" that you got here for declaring what's correct as per cyberpunk or the game or the genre, your opinion ? stop determining what's correct and what not.

More of this is it just lives on the Hypemachine, and delays upon delays, lot of changes. The new gig trailer starts "Night city, the city of endless oppurtunities.." screams GTA clone (Watchdogs2) with all that happy go theme.