|
|
|||||||
| Technical threads All discussions about technical issues |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
11-04-2012, 03:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Have a read of this article which is very pro Win8 and tell me where you think flight simulations will fit in? Even now on MSDN you can't officially develop games for Windows 8 metro using DirectX or OpenGL. Everything points you to XBoX and Windows Phones / Tablets programming using C# / HTML5 / XNA. Nothing wrong with those for your Angry Bird type games, but for cutting edge flight simulations nothing beats C / C++ with DirectX / OpenGL. As it stands with games developed using Mono C# which are on sale now on Win8, they admit that those games take a performance hit of anywhere from 10% to 40% compared to the same game developed on C++ and DirectX. Hardly a great thing for a flight sim or an ARMA III game. According to that article MS will eventually kill off the desktop, as many of the top game developers are predicting, so where will that leave games that need to push the limits of hardware, where will that leave the next chapter after BoM? I guess I'm ranting on like the hobo on the street corner yelling Armageddon but I just don't think people, who want flight sims to continue, fully understand what Win8 represents. MS needs to lift the Gestapo-Ness of Metro development because I firmly believe the desktop will be killed off eventually. If you want to get a feel of what a Metro flight sim will be like have a look at Infinite Flight: http://flyingdevstudio.blogspot.com.au/p/games.html?m=1 Hardly what I would call serious flight simming. Otherwise us flight simmer may very well be heading off to Linux world. Last edited by AirHog71; 11-04-2012 at 03:59 AM. 
|
|
#3
11-04-2012, 05:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok I need to back track and correct my rant
 Looks like you can write an Win App Store compliant game using C++ / DirectX http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr.../br229580.aspx Edit: Have learned that this is managed c++ / cli, so the performance still wouldn't be as good as unmanaged c++. Last edited by AirHog71; 11-04-2012 at 11:50 AM.
|
|
#4
11-04-2012, 08:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi,
I think it is up to the devs whether they support only metro or stick to the standard desktop. If most of the devs do not support metro, ms can push but will loose in the end. As a Linuxuser I will have absolutly no probs when games, steam ... convert to Linux. The question why only CloD does not work still persists. Yesterday I thought of configuring dualboot with win8 and win7, just for CloD...
|
|
#5
11-04-2012, 10:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
win 8 cost me a £25 upgrade, i don't use metro per se, i dont have an iphone or ipad etc, and for normal desktop computing and gaming win8 does the job (apart from CloD)  but if ever MS were to patch into the OS restrictive measures binding me to Metro, and using the Windows platform as an OS harmed pc gaming i would immediatedly uninstall it, and move to an OS that better met my needs, I am also very vindictive, so if MS showed me no respect for what I required as a customer, i would definately NOT reinstall win7, theres no point as the OS is dead. i would look elsewhere on the principle.However MS failed big time on their latest flight endeavour "Flight" and there really isn't anything out there in real sim to compete against MSF-X (which works btw on win   and i suppose i could dual boot my win7 to run any applications metro intimidates If Luthier and his team release BoM and there is still only up to win7 compatibility, i might then relent and dual boot the system, but why should i have to? people here say things like "dont expect the devs to do anything soon on win8" but MS sure arn't going to either are they, most win7,XP,vista,ME,and win98/95 programs and apps work, the reason CloD doesn't MUST be Luthiers funky code? just sayin' so i am sure the dev team are already working on win8 compatibility for BoM, and when it rolls out it will sort out the CloD problem, i can understand them not having the funds to dedicate work to it, and am happily prepared to wait (been waiting since Win8 RP) At the end of the day, if Metro kills c++ gaming on MS OS, people like us, gamers, modders, will just roll back to a previous system, or dedicate another PC to real gaming. Last edited by jojimbo; 11-04-2012 at 10:36 AM.
|
|
#7
11-04-2012, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
11-04-2012, 09:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Slightly OT and on a similar vein to AirHog and co., I think the point is that whether you can install third party programs to bypass Metro and regain the start menu or not, what is the actual advantage to installing Win 8 for a PC gamer? I haven't heard of any or seen any, but I bet they lock the next version of DirectX to Win 8 and above as they did with DX10/DX11 for Vista and above. I'm sick of supporting Microsoft as they continue to lock me into OS upgrades that I don't really need in order to access newer games and do little else but make my life a pain in the arse with such "features" as the shallow copy of sudo that was User Account Control.
I heard they even tried to patent that decades-old idea just to add blatant patent trolling to the reasons I can no longer support them. Even then they did it wrong by requiring no user password to bypass UAC, so it was just an annoyance and not a security feature. Don't get me wrong, I've been watching videos and taking a look at reviews and write-ups of Win 8 since it was first announced just out of curiosity, I just still can't see any advantage. WinXP to 7 was a good upgrade because it gave me access to some features of modern hardware e.g. TRIM for SSDs, but other than that I can't think of another killer/must-have feature. Homegroups was flaky, System Restore still doesn't work, Windows Easy Transfer didn't work from XP the one time I tried it, the Control Panel is now even less intuitive, with some features only available from hyperlinks on the sidebar of other menus (not to mention the fact that joystick calibration, etc. has been split out into the games menu), the OS is still hilariously insecure compared to every other and maintaining it is just no fun, with each clean install requiring nearly every incremental update rather than a new combined update. Also, there is now a requirement to install the previous operating system when using an upgrade disc rather than simply inserting the older OS's disc to go along with the annoyance of activation. Given that the only reason I even boot into Windows at home any more is to play games, and with Valve planning to port their games to Linux, I am a happy camper and will be very happy to finally put a bullet in my Windows install when the day comes that I am no longer playing games that don't work in WINE and aren't ported to Linux/OpenGL. Hilariously, L4D2 runs faster in Linux/OpenGL on the same hardware as well, which is somewhat embarrassing considering that Linux development is a new thing at Valve: "Running Left 4 Dead 2 on Windows 7 with Direct3D drivers, we get 270.6 FPS as a baseline. The data is generated from an internal test case. When we started with Linux, the initial version we got up and running was at 6 FPS. This is typical of an initial successful port to a new platform. ... After this work, Left 4 Dead 2 is running at 315 FPS on Linux. That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive, given the greater amount of time we have spent on the Windows version. However, it does speak to the underlying efficiency of the kernel and OpenGL. Interestingly, in the process of working with hardware vendors we also sped up the OpenGL implementation on Windows. Left 4 Dead 2 is now running at 303.4 FPS with that configuration." This experience lead to the question: why does an OpenGL version of our game run faster than Direct3D on Windows 7? It appears that it’s not related to multitasking overhead. We have been doing some fairly close analysis and it comes down to a few additional microseconds overhead per batch in Direct3D which does not affect OpenGL on Windows. Now that we know the hardware is capable of more performance, we will go back and figure out how to mitigate this effect under Direct3D." [Source: Valve Linux ] The only sticking point I can foresee for simmers is Linux/Mac OS drivers for TrackIR, because the lack of interest from NaturalPoint is obvious. tl;dr I can find no advantage in upgrading to Win 8. Every other major OS is still better for everything except gaming support and that is now rapidly changing because the biggest game distribution service is jumping ship.
|
|
#9
11-04-2012, 10:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't have Steam / CoD here at work, if anyone has some knowhow and has a Windows SDK installed can you run a program called ILDASM.EXE (usually in the \bin folder of the SDK), then from within ILDASM.EXE open up the launcher.exe for CoD and double click on manifest key.
You should see what .NET version is required in the text output (this is assuming the .exe is a .NET application of course) You can view the manifest of any .NET .exe or .dll, this may help nail down the .NET issue with Win8 and CoD. Just remeber each version of .NET is idenpendant of each other, i.e. .NET 4.5 does not include all previous versions. If an app was created in .NET 3.5 and the machine only has .NET 4.0 installed, the app wont run. The user would need to install .NET 3.5.
|
|
#10
11-04-2012, 11:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
here's the manifest code: Net 4.0 by the look of it.
Code:
// Metadata version: v4.0.30319
.assembly extern mscorlib
{
.publickeytoken = (B7 7A 5C 56 19 34 E0 89 ) // .z\V.4..
.ver 4:0:0:0
}
.assembly extern maddox
{
.publickeytoken = (8B 68 39 72 5E 48 40 4F ) // .h9r^H@O
.ver 1:0:0:0
}
.assembly Launcher
{
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyCopyrightAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 1D 43 6F 70 79 72 69 67 68 74 20 C2 A9 20 // ...Copyright ..
31 43 3A 53 6F 66 74 43 6C 75 62 20 32 30 31 30 // 1C:SoftClub 2010
00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyDescriptionAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyConfigurationAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyCompanyAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 0B 31 43 3A 53 6F 66 74 43 6C 75 62 00 00 ) // ...1C:SoftClub..
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyProductAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 08 4C 61 75 6E 63 68 65 72 00 00 ) // ...Launcher..
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyTitleAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 08 4C 61 75 6E 63 68 65 72 00 00 ) // ...Launcher..
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyTrademarkAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyDelaySignAttribute::.ctor(bool) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyKeyFileAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Reflection.AssemblyKeyNameAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Runtime.Versioning.TargetFrameworkAttribute::.ctor(string) = ( 01 00 29 2E 4E 45 54 46 72 61 6D 65 77 6F 72 6B // ..).NETFramework
2C 56 65 72 73 69 6F 6E 3D 76 34 2E 30 2C 50 72 // ,Version=v4.0,Pr
6F 66 69 6C 65 3D 43 6C 69 65 6E 74 01 00 54 0E // ofile=Client..T.
14 46 72 61 6D 65 77 6F 72 6B 44 69 73 70 6C 61 // .FrameworkDispla
79 4E 61 6D 65 1F 2E 4E 45 54 20 46 72 61 6D 65 // yName..NET Frame
77 6F 72 6B 20 34 20 43 6C 69 65 6E 74 20 50 72 // work 4 Client Pr
6F 66 69 6C 65 ) // ofile
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Runtime.CompilerServices.CompilationRelaxationsAttribute::.ctor(int32) = ( 01 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 )
.custom instance void [mscorlib]System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeCompatibilityAttribute::.ctor() = ( 01 00 01 00 54 02 16 57 72 61 70 4E 6F 6E 45 78 // ....T..WrapNonEx
63 65 70 74 69 6F 6E 54 68 72 6F 77 73 01 ) // ceptionThrows.
.publickey = (00 24 00 00 04 80 00 00 94 00 00 00 06 02 00 00 // .$..............
00 24 00 00 52 53 41 31 00 04 00 00 01 00 01 00 // .$..RSA1........
E7 98 EB 75 11 26 5B 45 8D 28 F3 F0 39 5C E7 1D // ...u.&[E.(..9\..
77 80 D7 93 6D B4 11 5C B8 24 88 A0 47 A5 BE B6 // w...m..\.$..G...
0E CE 1E 5D A1 CB 17 F9 2F B5 0D FF 59 08 6F 14 // ...]..../...Y.o.
D3 F4 FE D1 78 5B 82 60 AF 49 A9 FF A5 67 C8 12 // ....x[.`.I...g..
66 DC CA 26 1B 82 3E 5F DE C1 2C BE EA F1 7B 08 // f..&..>_..,...{.
20 E1 70 2A FE F2 FA 15 47 9E 5A CB 24 B6 7A E7 // .p*....G.Z.$.z.
73 C3 C4 E0 51 A1 2E B9 3F A6 E0 1E 26 0B B3 5E // s...Q...?...&..^
2D 3D 91 81 6B 65 03 93 CA B6 48 D9 50 CB 2E C0 ) // -=..ke....H.P...
.hash algorithm 0x00008004
.ver 1:0:0:0
}
.module Launcher.exe
// MVID: {458DE738-7931-4000-A6B5-87E73479C4A3}
.imagebase 0x11000000
.file alignment 0x00001000
.stackreserve 0x00100000
.subsystem 0x0002 // WINDOWS_GUI
.corflags 0x0000000b // ILONLY 32BITREQUIRED
// Image base: 0x06030000
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
