A Bright Future or Dark Days for PC gaming?

[KaZuYa]

Now I'm not tech savvy at all but from what I've read and been told by friends I'm rather concerned about the direction AMD has decided to go with GPU's with the new R9 series. These are based on current 7000 series tech but use mantle to run supported graphics engines much more efficiently and directly giving much better performance for less rather than using DX which is pretty outdated and inefficient.

Now this sounds great but then I had a thought would this actually destroy the last bastion of PC gaming and turn our machines into self built consoles? Why I say this is the term SUPPORTED engines and the fact the first and seriously major partner with AMD is EA aka Evil Incarnate Corp, if companies like EA and Blizzard/Activision control the supported engines like Frostbite 3 they could hold them to ransom demanding huge licensing fees for developers to use them. If this is the case and Nvidia follow suit then us PC gamers will lose out on price of games and quality being force fed IP's because independent developers can't use any high end graphics because EA/BA won't licence them and our systems can't run it.

Now I might be utterly wrong how this works but it does seem possible and very worrying.

Your Thoughts?

 

[SJXarg]

I don't really know where to begin with this one, so I guess I'll grab a couple of quotes and work from there.

First up,

These are based on current 7000 series tech but use mantle to run supported graphics engines much more efficiently and directly giving much better performance for less rather than using DX which is pretty outdated and inefficient.

This is good news, if all goes to plan, it's more performance basically for free (if you happen to own a Mantle capable device). Sounds good right?


Except..

Now this sounds great but then I had a thought would this actually destroy the last bastion of PC gaming and turn our machines into self built consoles?

Here's where I have an issue. Why does a for free (if you own a Mantle capable gpu) performance increase = self built console? That's an oxymoron right there. There are no self-built consoles. When you buy a console, you get a box with motherboard A, cpu B, ram C in quantity D, gpu E, custom OS F and one of a small selection of hard drives of set capacities. That, to me, clashes directly with the idea of building your own.

Now if you want to argue that prebuilt pc/laptop = console-like, or Steambox = customisable console (assuming you consider the Steambox to be a console at all, to me it seems to be a pc that you can upgrade that comes with its own OS, are Macs consoles too?)


Coupled with

Why I say this is the term SUPPORTED engines and the fact the first and seriously major partner with AMD is EA aka Evil Incarnate Corp, if companies like EA and Blizzard/Activision control the supported engines like Frostbite 3 they could hold them to ransom demanding huge licensing fees for developers to use them.

How is that worse than Microsoft having a stranglehold over gaming with DirectX? Frostbite 3 having better performance on a Mantle capable device doesn't suddenly mean all other game engines are unusable/nonviable. Really, I'm just going to stop there, because I'd like for you to address those point I've just raised.

 

[MammothBlade]

This just allows developers to enhance the capabilities of graphics further. It's not going to inhibit the ability of small developers to make games at the current level.

That, and this will challenge Microsoft, who will be pressured to partner with Intel or Nvidia to enhance or replace DirectX which badly needs a competitor. This is good for PC gamers, they'll see more choice and enhanced capabilities.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Here's one: I've seen a lot of hate for direct X, but what exactly is it, and why is it's monopoly so bad?

 

[Playful Pony]

Unfortunately I'm useless when it comes to PC technology, be it hardware or software. I know how to operate my own PC to a reasonable degree, but I know very little about how this stuff actually works, about the companies that makes it and about the stuff you are asking about here...

From my naive and ignorant standpoint it would seem to me like some new software would be a good thing? As you say, DX is pretty old by now and we could all benefit from something newer and better. Unless there is a particularily evil business plan behind it all...

 

[number2301]

Here's one: I've seen a lot of hate for direct X, but what exactly is it, and why is it's monopoly so bad?

DirectX is an API, that is, it's a standard was of interacting with graphics cards. It doesn't matter what graphics card a person has, as long as you're DirectX compliant then it'll work.

The alternative is low level coding, which accesses the features of the hardware more directly, but in that case you need to tailor your code to each piece of hardware.

DirectX isn't bad as such, it's just less efficient than low level coding. The monopoly people don't like is Windows.

 

[Vivi22]

Here's one: I've seen a lot of hate for direct X, but what exactly is it, and why is it's monopoly so bad?

DirectX is an API, that is, it's a standard was of interacting with graphics cards. It doesn't matter what graphics card a person has, as long as you're DirectX compliant then it'll work.

The alternative is low level coding, which accesses the features of the hardware more directly, but in that case you need to tailor your code to each piece of hardware.

DirectX isn't bad as such, it's just less efficient than low level coding. The monopoly people don't like is Windows.

Actually, the alternative to Direct X is OpenGL (I don't think any company in gaming bothers with lower level coding anymore aside from console optimization because it just isn't useful since it's not readily portable). But the big problem with Direct X is that because of Microsoft's virtual monopoly on graphics API's given the success of the 360 and how many windows machines are out there and how many people game on them, alternatives like Open GL don't get nearly enough support, and companies tend to make worse ports to OpenGL than the original Direct X version because they simply don't take the time to properly port it for a smaller market.

There are also some problems with OpenGL though since everyone and their mother use their own variation of it. The PS3 has its own implementation of OpenGL which isn't the same as OpenGL on the PC, etc. The people contributing to and developing OpenGl really need to get their shit together, but with the possibility of the Steam OS in the future being based on Linux, we might finally see enough cracks show up in Microsoft's PC gaming dominance that alternatives become more viable. And I'm a firm believer that more competition is always better for the consumer.

 

[Lightknight]

You're asking if technology that finally allows optimization between some computer components is somehow bad for a pc? I'm not seeing it. Optimization is one of the few benefits consoles have over pcs and while I don't get how you equate this to become self-made consoles (a contraction of terms as was already pointed out), I also think this is one of those areas that PCs benefit from being more like consoles where possible.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Your Thoughts?

How did you manage to survive nVidia purchasing Aegis' PhysX tech without swallowing your own head in panic?

 

[fix-the-spade]

Why I say this is the term SUPPORTED engines and the fact the first and seriously major partner with AMD is EA aka Evil Incarnate Corp, if companies like EA and Blizzard/Activision control the supported engines like Frostbite 3 they could hold them to ransom demanding huge licensing fees for developers to use them.

AMD reportedly paid EA $8million for Mantle support in BF4. Publishers/developers that own game engines do the opposite to what you're imagining, they want as many games built on their software as possible since they make money out of every single one. They want industry inertia on their side, as the Unreal and Quake engines demonstrate you can make more getting $1 out of every game sold with your engine than you can making your own full price games if enough big series use your software (consider that Id makes money out of Call of Duty and Epic gets cuts from everything from Bioshock to Mass Effect, Xcom, Transformers, Deus Ex...).

As far as an era of increased prices? Nah, Mantle's probably going to fall flat on it's face in a couple of years when Microsoft pulls it's finger out and re-writes Direct X. This is a weird attempt to go back to the nineties and every card maker having it's own API, which is dumb, remember the 3DFX API? How about 3D Rage? Glide ring a bell?

Mantel will be supported as long as AMD forks out massive sums of money to keep it that way (and drives the cost of GPU's up, not games). As soon as they stop (or Nvidia makes a better offer) it'll keel over and everything will go back to Direct X and open GL. Nobody will stop supporting Direct X because that would mean vaporising ninety percent of potential sales, or having a PR shit storm land on your head when you didn't tell the customers.

 

[WeepingAngels]

So, isn't OpenGL available to Windows users? If so, why don't devs just use that in the first place?

 

[Smooth Operator]

You condemn AMD while Nvidia is in bed with every major dev house known to the market and by extent games just plain work better with their hardware...

Bottom line is people need to be informed and call out bullshit on all sides, no AMD wouldn't mind getting some hardware exclusives and neither would Nvidia (which they already tried), but as long the community keeps them on their toes that can not happen and that is how we will keep things from spiraling out of control.
And this applies to DirectX just the same, MS is tightening the belt on compatibility and forcing people into new operating systems via DX now, having more competition that can slap them around will force them into proper support again.

 

[Nuvo]

Now this sounds great but then I had a thought would this actually destroy the last bastion of PC gaming and turn our machines into self built consoles? Why I say this is the term SUPPORTED engines and the fact the first and seriously major partner with AMD is EA aka Evil Incarnate Corp, if companies like EA and Blizzard/Activision control the supported engines like Frostbite 3 they could hold them to ransom demanding huge licensing fees for developers to use them. If this is the case and Nvidia follow suit then us PC gamers will lose out on price of games and quality being force fed IP's because independent developers can't use any high end graphics because EA/BA won't licence them and our systems can't run it.

1) If anyone is trying to turn PC's into consoles, it's Valve (the Steam Box, Steam Controller, SteamOS and Big Picture).

2) DirectX and OpenGL aren't likely to disappear any time soon, and with nVidia still around, it's unlikely that AMD will gain any kind of monopoly on PC any time soon.

3) If Mantle does take off, it's likely to be supported by the most commonly used game engines, which means engines like Unreal, Unity and CyEngine.
Since the developers of said engines make most of their money from licencing the commercial version of their engines, it's unlikely that they will simply not offer the Mantle version to other developers.

4) Developers which don't make console games aren't going to throw away their staff that know how to use DirectX or OpenGL just because AMD promises a few extra FPS or other bells and whistles, especially if Mantle makes game development harder, or if it lacks features DirectX and OpenGL have.

5) Considering the cost of graphics cards, it's unlikely that Mantle will take off quickly as not everyone will want to stump up between £150 and £500 for a new card if theirs isn't already based on AMD's GCN architecture.

6) If this makes GCN based graphics cards last longer, and means more performance from currently available GCN cards which will likely drop in price when the R7 and R9 series cards launch, I don't see that as a bad thing (I currently use a HD7770, but will hopefully be upgrading soon).

7) AMD has to be careful with Mantle as giving developers too much access to the graphics hardware could cause problems such as system wide performance issues and BSOD's, rather than just punting you back to the desktop when a game crashes.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Here's one: I've seen a lot of hate for direct X, but what exactly is it, and why is it's monopoly so bad?

It's an Windows based API and MS likes to make newer versions only compatible with the latest version of Windows.

Hence DirectX 11.2 is exclusive to that abortion of an tablet OS called Windows 8.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

I support the idea of Mantle, but unless it works well on Nvidia cards, there's no way it's going to take off. Right now Nvidia has the majority of graphics card sales, so why would you use an API that won't be able to be used by a majority of customers? And seeing how well a lot of AMD tech has worked on Nvidia cards in the past, I really don't have much faith in it.

 

[proghead]

My thoughts? No worries whatsoever. Every future game released will have a DX and/or OpenGL renderer implemented.

 

[loc978]

Brighter future than we had before. This is just a possible end to one more Microsoft monopoly. It's like seeing the return of the landscape we had in the late 90s, when every game had OpenGL support as well as DirectX.

 

[KaZuYa]

So AMD isn't trying to sell us rebranded 7000 series with mantle support, I'm just wondering how these cards with perform in games without mantle support