GSC Game World's released new screenshots of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat, showing off the difference in shadow quality between Direct X 10 and 11. Exciting stuff.
The PC follow-up has players taking on the role of an agent in the Ukraine Security Service, sent into the Zone to collect information on a failed military operation. A new interface, side quests and a 'free play' mode are promised.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2
Official trailer
2:04Spooky, radioactive Call of Pripyat footage is in the zone
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2
Official trailer
2:04Spooky, radioactive Call of Pripyat footage is in the zone
Age Restricted Content Please enter your date of birth below in order to verify your age before watching this video
You must be at least 0 years of age.
Play Again? Missed something? Just watch it again..
Watch More Videos Browse related videos and see what's new & popular
Share This Video Email this video, or embed it into your own web page
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2
Official trailer
2:04Spooky, radioactive Call of Pripyat footage is in the zone
Look at the difference between 9 and 10 (let me refer you to this : here)
Now go and look at the fuzzier edged shadows that DX11 promises.
whoa! Hold me back.
Sounds to me like there is a collusion going on here, no-one has got anything new to offer yet, but how on earth are they going to make you fork over another Ł300 for a GPU when you only bought that GTX285 3 months ago. Thats right, lock the new standard to new hardware.
Damn I built a new P.c for direct X10 to run Crysis, theres no way im upgrading my P.c yet just to play this with a few more shadows. Looks awesome though, its a shame Stalker nether made it onto the consoles like it was rumoured.
Am I missing something? Only difference I can see is that one set of screens appears slightly brighter than the other. But I can't see any noticable difference in quality anywhere.
See small differences. Can you spot the differences?
I can't.
See Spot run.
See dogsolitude_uk remaining unconvinced by rounder gasmask filters, keeping his money where it is, and waiting for a decent reason to upgrade.
Aye. I found myself questioning which pic was actually DX10 and which was DX11. I suspect that of the pics I looked at I actually ended up preferring the DX10 ones at times...but I could be wrong since I'm still not sure which one is which in some of the pics.
I do plan on upgrading to one of the new GPUs once Nvidia has released its GT300 line-up, at which point (hopefully) a price war will ensue between ATI and Nvidia just like last generation. If the initial reports that a HD 5850 can be overclocked with the ASUS "Voltage Power" function to match, or even surpass, the clocks on an OC'ed HD 5870, then I may just go for an HD 5850 but first let me see what Nvidia has up its sleeve (along with some non-reference designs for both camps in the coming months).
P.S. To the rest of you: You are not alone - while there are some slight differences in some of the pics (ex. look at the shadow cast by the tree on the ground - in one pic the shadow is more blurred/fuzzy compared to the harder/more solid shadow cast in the counterpart pic), the differences seem to me (and you,) to primarily be the lighting in the background and a more rounded gas mask filter cylinder. The differences seem negligible; what may not be so negligible will be the performance increase DX11 systems will experience when running DX9, 10, and 11 games (although the last one is still up in the air given the lack of DX11 games currently).
I doubt I'll be wasting Ł300+ anytime soon on another graphics card upgrade. About four of the games I have actually use directX 10 and one of those use it terribly to the point I reverted to directX 9 just to be able to play. And that was S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky. To me, I can't see directX 11 being much better, performance or visual wise.
Looking at the line up of terrific games due for release over the next few months, most of them using directX 9, I can see I'll be sticking with my trusty overclocked 9800 GX2 for a long time to come.
ahhh now i get it, directx 11 just tweaks my brightness settings a little! wow! thats incredible, this is as big a leap at when TV went colour!
seriously, what the hell? dx10 was impressive, it was an obvious improvment over dx9, but this? i couldnt tell the difference. and when it was labelled for me, half the time i preferred the dx10 one.
if this isnt proof that graphical power is slowing, i dont know what is.
ahhh now i get it, directx 11 just tweaks my brightness settings a little! wow! thats incredible, this is as big a leap at when TV went colour!
seriously, what the hell? dx10 was impressive, it was an obvious improvment over dx9, but this? i couldnt tell the difference. and when it was labelled for me, half the time i preferred the dx10 one.
if this isnt proof that graphical power is slowing, i dont know what is.
In all fairness though, tessellation and detail levels are pushed to new heights by DX11 but it is - so far at least - limited just how much of an improvement still images online manage to convey of DX11 over DX10.
I wont be upgrading for DirectX 11 but for the massive performance increase in all my games. I see Dx11 as a nice bonus. Wont be till early next year I think as I recently got a 260GTX with batman for Ł125 and its pretty damn fast. Still cant max out GTA4 or crysis (well I can but framerate isnt were I want it) so im kinda disappointed with it. Im sure I could sell it for Ł70 odd in a few months. Roll on the next gen!
Not much on the horizon for pc I'm interested in playing aion at the moment my laptop Alienware M17x) runs it nicely and guildwars 2 in the next 2-3 years time laptop will probably run that too. as for the screen shots it doesn't out do Killzone2 even if its usin dx11. I never seen sense in waiting 3-6+ months for pc versions of console games JUST so they look better. Pc gaming is definatly not what it once was. FPS games were never challenging on pc either I always played through on hardest level with mouse and keyboard with relative ease. Consoles controls maybe clunkier but it adds to the chanllenge and all round experience. I've still some fond memories of my pc gaming years so I'm not dissing it in anyway.
I have a 295gtx and i still play most of my game under xp, i do boot up vista from time to time to see the dx10 black magic and it must be very black as i can only see small changes, i also have windows 7 installed but dont think i will change my gpu for a while as i can't see a hole lot of difference from dx 9 to 11, its not got the massive gains 8 and 9 had.
It's pretty obvious this game supported DirectX 11 as an afterthough. I think we'll have to wait a year or more until we see any games really start to take advantage of DirectX 11
I had to look REALLY hard to notice any difference at all. If this was a full game and you were in the middle of some frenetic action you wouldn't notice anything. It certainly isn't worth spending money to have the difference.
Not much on the horizon for pc I'm interested in playing aion at the moment my laptop Alienware M17x) runs it nicely and guildwars 2 in the next 2-3 years time laptop will probably run that too. as for the screen shots it doesn't out do Killzone2 even if its usin dx11. I never seen sense in waiting 3-6+ months for pc versions of console games JUST so they look better. Pc gaming is definatly not what it once was. FPS games were never challenging on pc either I always played through on hardest level with mouse and keyboard with relative ease. Consoles controls maybe clunkier but it adds to the chanllenge and all round experience. I've still some fond memories of my pc gaming years so I'm not dissing it in anyway.
I couldn't disagree more. FPS was made on and for the PC. Console versions are often the poor cousin's version in comparison. They are often dumbed-down, look worse, have less features, lack mod options and the controls are a joke. If that's how you like your FPS'es by all means continue with them on the consoles. Personally I refuse to buy any more FPS games for my Xbox 360 if they are available on the PC...And if they aren't available on the PC I'm inclined to pass.
KFD_Case has clearly never played a console FPS in his life. The games look as good, are never "dumbed" down (actually the PC and console versions of games are IDENTICAL), and when you get the hang of those controls, they're AS GOOD as a mouse. No kiddin'.
I've got a gaming PC, X360 and a PS3, and I prefer playing on consoles. No hassle with hardware, no hassle with drivers, they get almost all of the same games, the pad controller is as good (or better in some games), and it's nicer to play on the livingroom couch. And you don't get shafted with a Ł300 bill every year, when the new DirectX ships and you gotta get the latest graphics card.
KFD_Case has clearly never played a console FPS in his life. The games look as good, are never "dumbed" down (actually the PC and console versions of games are IDENTICAL), and when you get the hang of those controls, they're AS GOOD as a mouse. No kiddin'.
I've got a gaming PC, X360 and a PS3, and I prefer playing on consoles. No hassle with hardware, no hassle with drivers, they get almost all of the same games, the pad controller is as good (or better in some games), and it's nicer to play on the livingroom couch. And you don't get shafted with a Ł300 bill every year, when the new DirectX ships and you gotta get the latest graphics card.
How wrong you are, but then that's hardly surprising considering you have taken it upon yourself to be a so-called "authority" on my persona. Of course you failed to do your homework and thus your claims are equally false as they are preposterous. I own, and have played, FPS games for the Xbox 360. I was not impressed with the controls hence the reason I wouldn't want to touch them with a 10 foot pole compared to my M&K setup. You may prefer the gamepad, yet on the technological side of things there is no arguing which setup is more advanced, sports greater precision and reaction times. It's the gaming keyboard and mouse. Argue with it all you want, but the scientific facts are not on your side in this case.
If we factor in a HD-ready or a true HD LCD or plasma screen TV along with the much higher game prices of console games, potential add-ons (yet even without them) along with the price of a console, I would not be surprised if the price range is similar, if not greater, to what it costs to design and buy a gaming PC from a *hardware website* (not special game PC companies who charge excessive fees for the hardware; the same goes for retail stores) including it's keyboard, mouse and monitor over a 5 year period. Yes, PC games are that much cheaper. The perception that a good gaming PC needs to cost 2,000 quid or more is a myth. Far less will do it, especially if you take the time to do a bit of research on which components you want and then search for competitive prices. Even when you pay someone else to assemble your PC rig, it needn't cost all that much for the assembly.
Speaking of 5 years, my personal experience with gaming PCs is that they can play games for about 5 years without any major upgrades *if you designed them to be powerful workhorses to start with*! Once you reach those 5 years their tech tends to become antiquated that it's a struggle to play some of the latest releases even at minimum settings (of course, if software tech remained stagnant then PCs could operate much like consoles do, which is to say indefinitely as long as no new gimmicks are thrown in to the spanner-works). As long as you do your homework, lay a solid foundation when designing your PC and pay attention to quality components and inter-system stability you can keep chugging away for a good number of years...and that's if you want to play the steady stream of new releases. If you just want to play an older games library, much less will suffice. No on *has* to upgrade to a 300 quid GPU every year, in fact it would probably only be the extreme enthusiasts and those who tie their ego up in their PC. My current PC runs with an HD 4870 which blows any of the consoles GPUs out of the water and still handles every PC game I throw its way without trouble. Is it the fastest card out there now? Nope; it was more or less when I first bought it and I like the looks of the HD 5800 series, but I don't *need* to upgrade yet unless I decide I want to try DX11 along with Windows 7 which I have pre-ordered at a third of its usual price.
PC configurations can certainly cause issues, yet what I love about the PC - which I will probably continue to adore as long as I live - is the unrivaled freedom the PC gives its users compared to console users. Console users whom do not also game on PCs are stuck taking whatever the developers and publishers decide to give them regardless of whether they like it or not. The PC crowd is much harder to control and it's a beautiful thing. Besides, the PC can do everything and more that all of the consoles combined do. PC hardware leads the way and the consoles follow a few years behind.
The PC crowd is much harder to control and it's a beautiful thing.
Eh?..
The PC crowd has far more options in regards to modding and/or finding ways around limitations placed intentionally in a product (for example, useless SecuROM crap which is intended as a control tool and fails miserably every time to date).
I have a 295gtx and i still play most of my game under xp, i do boot up vista from time to time to see the dx10 black magic and it must be very black as i can only see small changes, i also have windows 7 installed but dont think i will change my gpu for a while as i can't see a hole lot of difference from dx 9 to 11, its not got the massive gains 8 and 9 had.
...of the games I have actually use directX 10 and one of those use it terribly to the point I reverted to directX 9 just to be able to play. And that was S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky...
Ah-ha! Not just me then. I was most disappointed when my fancy new kit decided that it would freak out at the sight of Clear Sky
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
