I wonder if 1C would consider releasing TWO versions of CoD; "CoD Lite" (for the Win XP DX9 systems) and "COD Heavy Duty" (for Vista/Win 7 DX10/11 systems). That way legal obligations to continue support for older Win XP systems would be fulfilled, yet 1C wouldn't be hamstrung in further development of BoM (not to mention further updates of CoD Heavy Duty).

This thought occurred to me yesterday after purchasing Disastersoft's excellent "Wick vs Dundas" add on for CoD. They offer two downloads -- one is designed for slower systems and isn't as heavily populated with objects/aircraft etc to keep framerates acceptable. Purchase of one version entitles you to a download of the other should you need or desire it.

If they don't drop DX 9 support with BoM they're simply stupid.

Way to go with yer statement there. Tell them how it is done.

Have to agree on dropping DX9 support. If they want to use this engine for the next 10 years, they have to be on the top of technology today...

Agree. As I've read elsewhere, 1C has to honour its commitment to support Win XP/DX9 in Cliffs of Dover for existing customers. I don't believe any such commitment was made for BoM. As a layman (I'm no programmer nor sim designer) it would just make sense to have the current CoD playable for DX9 by completing as many fixes as possible for it and declaring it "done". To make both camps happy perhaps license a 3rd party like Disastersoft to include some GOOD campaigns. Meanwhile, work could continue in earnest on the "CoD Heavy Duty/BoM" engine. As customers, we could be confident that if it works well in Cliffs of Dover Heavy Duty, then it's worth spending the bucks for Battle of Moscow. Knowing this, I would be willing to ante up the cash for BoM, as would most others in the CoD/IL2: 1946 community.

Well they are simply stupid if they drop DX9 and implement DX10 instead of DX11 ! Even Microsoft dropped DX10 as it was buggy and unstable.

It really hurts to see what is left from all this more than one year later.....:(

True but Microsoft don't drooped DX10, it just get outdated because the fixes are in DX11.

with the introduction of DX10 Microsoft rebuild his API to be more flexible, in past with every new version you had to buy a video card that supported the new version but now you can use a DX10 card with a DX11 game.

It just happen that you will not benefit of the improvements that the game use through DX11 but you still can play the game.

Also the new versions are not a complete build like was in past but small improvements and more frequents because no new hardware is required.

DX10 was the base build and the post versions are just upsets, like small upgrades, so you can use the DX10 api and use some calls to DX11.

An example between DX10 and DX11 can be the how the shadows are done, in DX10 they are hardware demanding but in DX11 this disadvantage was fixed and you can use high quality shadows without lose much performance.

Another fix done in DX11 was better AA performance and better HDR precision.

So to sum all ... having the game now written in DX10 is not a disadvantage, they just should go straight for the necessary DX11 calls to improve the game.

no need, there are plenty of big titles that support both 9c and 11 without the need for 2 versions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...Released_games

So does the current retail version of Cliffs of Dover. However, the recent alpha/beta version does not support DX9c. Why is that?

I would guess that they have not modified the video settings in the game to reflect those with 9 vs those with 11, in other words certain settings should be only available to 9 and 11 users respectively.