Question For BlackSix

[Ataros]

Originally Posted by DroopSnoot

Its more about what they advertised and still advertise on the box

They advertise only "DX11 API support" but not implemented DX11 features if you can see the difference. The support means that features can be added in the future within the same engine (unlike RoF for instance which is DX9 only).

[DroopSnoot]

Originally Posted by Ataros

They advertise only "DX11 API support" but not implemented DX11 features if you can see the difference. The support means that features can be added in the future within the same engine (unlike RoF for instance which is DX9 only).

play on words, roger.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Ataros

They advertise only "DX11 API support" but not implemented DX11 features if you can see the difference. The support means that features can be added in the future within the same engine (unlike RoF for instance which is DX9 only).

good point, fair cop 'gov

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by DroopSnoot

play on words, roger.

Not at all

The game uses DX10 'feature levels'
The game is programed using the DX11 API

The only play on words in this forum is those who try to ignore the API part associated with DX11

Hair-splitting semantics, as DroopSnoot correctly says.

I'd imagine your average buyer would make no such distinction, simply supposing it uses the latest, greatest technology.

It doesn't do this. It makes provision - like so much else - for using the latest, greatest technology in the future. Maybe.

If you want to get into a war of words about APIs, HALs, run-times and routines and differences in memory management, we could do that..

But it's all at one remove - as usual - from the player experience.

The fact is it's got up to sound like it uses the latest and greatest. It doesn't, for a variety of reasons.

But hey, when did publishing houses ever let facts get int he way of advertising and PR, so you can't really hold up the devs to blame for this entirely.

But to harp on hair-splitting semantics, as the apologists do, is just plain silly - if not expected.

Ben

[bongodriver]

Hair-splitting semantics, as DroopSnoot correctly says.

I'd imagine your average buyer would make no such distinction, simply supposing it uses the latest, greatest technology.

It doesn't do this. It makes provision - like so much else - for using the latest, greatest technology in the future. Maybe.

So the fact that it's the truth i.e. it is written using DX11 API with DX10 feature levels is a bad thing?

and you don't seem to see the real 'hair splitting' is being done by those such as yourself, the message could just as easily be for the above average buyer who does understand the concept (I see no reason for us to be excluded), the fact it is not using DX11 feature levels will have no bearing on the average user, the average user wether they have DX9, DX10 or DX11 hardware will still be able to use it.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

Hair-splitting semantics

It may seem that way to those who don't understand the difference between DX10 features levels and DX11 API programing enviorment

I dont think so

hair-splitting coupled with finger-ends-holding-onto-cliff

(the number of technically savvy users may be higher than your average game, but is still likely to be a tiny proportion of overall buyers IMO)

Ace-of-Aces said:

>>It may seem that way to those who don't understand the difference between DX10 features levels and DX11 API programing enviorment <<

Desperation?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

Ace-of-Aces said:

>>It may seem that way to those who don't understand the difference between DX10 features levels and DX11 API programing enviorment <<

Desperation?

Yes, I think it is.....desparation to make people 'get it' and stop whinging about it.