amd AMD: No DirectX 12 for you!

[f0rk_b0mb]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/04/12/1847250/amd-says-there-will-be-no-directx-12-ever

Microsoft really likes shooting itself in the foot lately, eh? What does this mean for gaming on Windows?

[ToneKnee]

Chances are Microsoft is just focusing on getting the next Xbox out the door.

[Arceles]

Great to see this until certain point, it means that OpenGL is winning... and OpenGL is platform independent.

[spaceelf]

Chances are Microsoft is just focusing on getting the next Xbox out the door.

I suspect there's also the low (yet improving) adoption of DX11. What's the point in rushing another one out if a good chunk of developers haven't even bothered to migrate to the current one?

Once XP is gone and they've expanded on their plans for Windows' future I expect to hear more on this topic.

Great to see this until certain point, it means that OpenGL is winning... and OpenGL is platform independent.

Considering their DX11 equivalent came three years later, I wouldn't really call that 'winning.'

[Astra.Xtreme]

I'm sure there will be a DirectX 12 eventually. DX11 is barely utilized anywhere right now, so they might as well wait another 5 years or so before even considering DX12.

[HawkMan]

all this from a google transalted article from an AMD "salesman".... yeah...

[ZakO]

Take with a pinch of salt, the original article is in German, it has then been "quoted" (and probably mistranslated) by an anti-MS blog.

Just because it might not be released as quick as DX10 -> DX11 that doesn't mean it won't ever happen. DX11 isn't even being widely used yet.

[HawkMan]

Great to see this until certain point, it means that OpenGL is winning... and OpenGL is platform independent.

No and no.

How many games today is running OpenGL. and MS won't abandon DX considering it's the cornerstone of the xbox. as for platform intependent, that's true only to a point. OGL has pretty bad performance compared to DX on windows, add in the fact that the majority of work when converting a game from windows to linux or OSX isn't switching the render engine. compared to the rest of the coding, that's childs play.

[George P Global Moderator]

This guy has no idea what MS is going to do with DirectX, they've made it core to everything that there is no way to just stop developing for it. They even came out and officially said they haven't stopped or plan to.

[HawkMan]

I'm sure there will be a DirectX 12 eventually. DX11 is barely utilized anywhere right now, so they might as well wait another 5 years or so before even considering DX12.

and basically this. why make a replacement already when there's no need for it yet. to fast evolution has already stagnated and killed a lot of development, and creates and unhealthy rush for graphics cards where they keep holding back features to lure gamers into buying new gear all the time.

that's why MS created stricter rules for DX years ago, to prevent Nvidia and ATI from creating ever more ATI and Nvidia only features into "DX" games.

[xendrome]

Wasn't this already proven false like 2 weeks ago, there was some story or thread I saw about it, and Microsoft responded already to the rumor....

[George P Global Moderator]

Don't forget that the next Xbox is said to use DX11.1 iirc, so once that's out and being worked on they'll move on to the next version. I expected a update around the next major version of Windows comes out, late 2014 maybe.

[theyarecomingforyou]

The last things gamers need is manufacturers working on vendor-exclusive features, as that threatens to undermine all the progress that has been made. I imagine if DirectX development ceases that nVidia and AMD would then push for OpenGL (or similar) as a selling point. Simply printing "faster" on the box isn't going to be enough.

If true it might actually be good for the industry, as Microsoft's control over DirectX has held the industry hostage to a degree. Microsoft hasn't been acting in the best interests of PC gaming since the original Xbox was released.

[Arceles]

No and no.

How many games today is running OpenGL. and MS won't abandon DX considering it's the cornerstone of the xbox. as for platform intependent, that's true only to a point. OGL has pretty bad performance compared to DX on windows, add in the fact that the majority of work when converting a game from windows to linux or OSX isn't switching the render engine. compared to the rest of the coding, that's childs play.

Ah... HawkMan, yeah, the rendering engine is troublesome as I indeed have tested, yet OpenGL is far from being bad, I however agree that it WAS bad before, nowadays it may not have the performance of DirectX but it's very close to it, OpenGL has support from far more companies other than gaming, and that's why it's progressing quite fast, mobile industry is helping on that too, DirectX has the days counted, not now, not tomorrow not the next year but it will surely die by its very own closed source nature and windows centrality.

[torrentthief]

For the lifespan of the xbox 720 ms will just use dx11.1 possibly, it will become popular by then as xp will die in 1yr and vista in a few years so everyone will be running dx11.x then.

I wouldn't rule out microsoft switching to opengl in several years from now due to the significant marketshare that mobile now has.

[HawkMan]

Ah... HawkMan, yeah, the rendering engine is troublesome as I indeed have tested, yet OpenGL is far from being bad, I however agree that it WAS bad before, nowadays it may not have the performance of DirectX but it's very close to it, OpenGL has support from far more companies other than gaming, and that's why it's progressing quite fast, mobile industry is helping on that too, DirectX has the days counted, not now, not tomorrow not the next year but it will surely die by its very own closed source nature and windows centrality.

As long as DX stays ahead of OGL it won't be abandoned, and so far there's not hint of that ever changing. and what other companies do you refer to, 3D modelling apps enerally support both. but very few people use the OGL mode. back in the days (more than 10 years ago) I often used OGL in MAX, since while DX gave better performance, OGL handled mesh error better without crashing. but today, DX is just as good at that and gives better performance.

[vcfan]

Like xendrome said, this is bs and ms even came out and said its bogus info.

[HawkMan]

The last things gamers need is manufacturers working on vendor-exclusive features, as that threatens to undermine all the progress that has been made. I imagine if DirectX development ceases that nVidia and AMD would then push for OpenGL (or similar) as a selling point. Simply printing "faster" on the box isn't going to be enough.

If true it might actually be good for the industry, as Microsoft's control over DirectX has held the industry hostage to a degree. Microsoft hasn't been acting in the best interests of PC gaming since the original Xbox was released.

There's a problem with that. the only reason we DON'T have all the vendor specific features today is because of DX. if OGL takes over from DX in PC gaming then MS can no longer force the developers and VGA vendors to play nice and not offer vendor specific features anymore. And you'll again be back where we were before DX 9/10. Every game will come with a list of features that says "only works on Nvidie" or "Only works on AMD".

[Veiva]

There's a problem with that. the only reason we DON'T have all the vendor specific features today is because of DX. if OGL takes over from DX in PC gaming then MS can no longer force the developers and VGA vendors to play nice and not offer vendor specific features anymore. And you'll again be back where we were before DX 9/10. Every game will come with a list of features that says "only works on Nvidie" or "Only works on AMD".

No? OpenGL is not that open. It's governed by the Khronos group, and as long as a game developer targets a release of OpenGL (e..g, OpenGL 3, 4...), then all will be good as long as the GPU manufacturers support that version properly.

Considering their DX11 equivalent came three years later, I wouldn't really call that 'winning.'

Similarly, the neat thing about OpenGL is that new features can be exposed to application developers long before a new release. That is what ARB is for.

[spaceelf]

Similarly, the neat thing about OpenGL is that new features can be exposed to application developers long before a new release. That is what ARB is for.

That doesn't really change my point. Until OpenGL has supporters and is ahead of the game rather than catching up, it's not 'winning' anything.

It might get some companies, but I'm not expecting some mass exodus here unless it's got more selling points than cross platform.

[Veiva]

That doesn't really change my point. Until OpenGL has supporters and is ahead of the game rather than catching up, it's not 'winning' anything.

It might get some companies, but I'm not expecting some mass exodus here unless it's got more selling points than cross platform.

My point is that OpenGL isn't playing "catch up." It can, and did, have features that DirectX didn't have at many points. DirectX is just an industry standard, not because it's special or better, but because it's better supported on the Windows platform because of Microsoft. It's like calling Internet Explorer better during its reign because it was better supported by websites.

[HawkMan]

No? OpenGL is not that open. It's governed by the Khronos group, and as long as a game developer targets a release of OpenGL (e..g, OpenGL 3, 4...), then all will be good as long as the GPU manufacturers support that version properly.

Except, the vendors don't need to listen to the Khronos group to the same degree.

[spaceelf]

My point is that OpenGL isn't playing "catch up." It can, and did, have features that DirectX didn't have at many points.

Yes, it did. After three years. I do believe I said that.

If DX12 does come out, I expect the next OpenGL to beat it...after another three years.

[Phouchg]

Ah... HawkMan, yeah, the rendering engine is troublesome as I indeed have tested, yet OpenGL is far from being bad, I however agree that it WAS bad before, nowadays it may not have the performance of DirectX but it's very close to it, OpenGL has support from far more companies other than gaming, and that's why it's progressing quite fast, mobile industry is helping on that too, DirectX has the days counted, not now, not tomorrow not the next year but it will surely die by its very own closed source nature and windows centrality.

Yes, it will. And PC gaming will once again become the clusterf*ck that mobile gaming is now (and suffer the fate as any half-open platform - nobody can settle down for a single thing unless someone like evil Microsoft strong arms them into total obedience) - this doesn't run that, this doesn't support that, needs this version of that, works on mine, I don't give a flying. This is no progress, this is the road to hell.

[Veiva]

That doesn't really change my point. Until OpenGL has supporters and is ahead of the game rather than catching up, it's not 'winning' anything.

It might get some companies, but I'm not expecting some mass exodus here unless it's got more selling points than cross platform.

It's not catching up. Keep on repeating it though--by doing so, it may become true!

Except, the vendors don't need to listen to the Khronos group to the same degree.

If you want a certified OpenGL spec, you really have no choice to listen to the Khronos group. For example, who (extensively) uses the NV_path_rendering extension? No one who wants to succeed in releasing a multiplatform game engine or modeling software, at least.

[spaceelf]

It's not catching up. Keep on repeating it though--by doing so, it may become true!

I already agreed to that point just now. Why you're quoting my original post instead of my reply I have absolutely no idea.