Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

Berniyh
Posts: 107
Joined: 24 Sep 2017 14:11

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#341 Post by Berniyh » 29 May 2023 17:15

JoeAlex23 wrote: 29 May 2023 16:55 To give people options? The transition from DX11 to DX12 is way simpler than moving DX11 to Vulkan.
How do you come to that conclusion?
User avatar
JoeAlex23
Posts: 2268
Joined: 04 Dec 2016 03:24
Location: Dominican Republic
Contact:

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#342 Post by JoeAlex23 » 29 May 2023 17:18

You're arguing just to argue, i'm a software developer, is like i know what i'm talking about or i might just be lying, who knows, all i know is that i'm not wasting my time explaining that.
Berniyh
Posts: 107
Joined: 24 Sep 2017 14:11

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#343 Post by Berniyh » 29 May 2023 17:27

xXCARL1992Xx wrote: 29 May 2023 16:58 especially if SCS will port the games to console in the far future is the use of DirectX the only viable solution, because Nintendo and PlayStation need their own APIs anyway contrary to the Xbox that also uses DirectX12
Actually, the Switch does support Vulkan and OpenGL:
https://www.shacknews.com/article/98265 ... -opengl-es
For PS5, there are rumors that it could run Vulkan, but I don't know if it's true. Or at least if so, then it's not used for performance reasons.
Nevertheless, the proprietary API is surely very close to Vulkan, since Vulkan is based on AMD's Mantle and AMD is providing the APUs for the PS5. They surely have developed the API together with Sony.
So I'm confident that sharing code between PS5's GNM and Vulkan should be possible to a good degree.

But overall, yes, that's the main (and only?) real argument I see pro DX12. It'd make porting to the current XBox easier.
However, as far as I know, there aren't even rumors of console ports being thing in the future?
Berniyh
Posts: 107
Joined: 24 Sep 2017 14:11

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#344 Post by Berniyh » 29 May 2023 17:36

JoeAlex23 wrote: 29 May 2023 17:18 You're arguing just to argue, i'm a software developer, is like i know what i'm talking about or i might just be lying, who knows, all i know is that i'm not wasting my time explaining that.
So you've got no basis for your statement whatsoever?
Some newbie driver
Posts: 7198
Joined: 12 Dec 2018 11:37

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#345 Post by Some newbie driver » 29 May 2023 17:40

Berniyh wrote: 29 May 2023 16:27And for that reason I'd bet that DX11 will stay for quite a while, just like OpenGL hasn't been dropped.
OpenGL version hasn't been dropped by two reasons:

1- It was the only option SCS has to give to Linux and Mac users until they could move to Vulkan
2- It didn't ballast the development of the architectural changes done so far.

But the moment that second point doesn't apply anymore like it could happen with DX11; then you can be sure both will be kicked out so fast you will not be able to say even goodbye.

Time ago we could had argued that SCS would had not removed support to Linux/M ac until having the Vulkan alternative. But today? Thanks to the massive effort Valve has put on Linux gaming to support their Steam Deck; that's not necessary anymore. SCS games are fully verified for SteamDeck; not sure if because the current OpenGL version. But considering what other kind of games have no problem with that console; it's probable SCS games could be compatible in their DX version with the Proton layer for Linux. And even if not actually, SCS could be interested in doing the necessary tweaks to make it possible so they keep the support for those Linux and Mac players in the midterm.

Regards

PS: And yes, DX11 to DX12 is way easier than DX9 to DX11. That doesn't mean that DX12 "easy" port will squeeze all the potential DX12 has, not at all; but that means that the change is "easy" enough for developers to do it and never look back and keep for later the future improvements.
Berniyh
Posts: 107
Joined: 24 Sep 2017 14:11

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#346 Post by Berniyh » 29 May 2023 18:02

Some newbie driver wrote: 29 May 2023 17:40But the moment that second point doesn't apply anymore like it could happen with DX11; then you can be sure both will be kicked out so fast you will not be able to say even goodbye.
Yeah, quite possible.
Time ago we could had argued that SCS would had not removed support to Linux/M ac until having the Vulkan alternative. But today? Thanks to the massive effort Valve has put on Linux gaming to support their Steam Deck; that's not necessary anymore. SCS games are fully verified for SteamDeck; not sure if because the current OpenGL version. But considering what other kind of games have no problem with that console; it's probable SCS games could be compatible in their DX version with the Proton layer for Linux. And even if not actually, SCS could be interested in doing the necessary tweaks to make it possible so they keep the support for those Linux and Mac players in the midterm.
I'd expect Valve to prioritize native ports over proton. Since it's just an AMD APU, I'm sure that ETS2 will run with sufficient performance with the OpenGL port on Linux to get the certificate.
Apart from the ugly graphics, I didn't personally have a problem with the native port either, it's running fine. Ok, there are some features missing (e.g. internet radio, eye tracker support), but I can live without those since I'm not using them.
But due to the ugly graphics, I'm pretty sure that in reality most people will run it via proton. The DX11 engine is just much better visually. And also gives better performance. But tbh, from the news item on that topic it seems unclear to me which it is.
In principle, it's fine to run it via proton. The only real problems with proton start when you're trying to use additional programs (like in my case linuxtrack) that have to be run in the same proton prefix.
Setting that up is a major hassle. Getting something like that up and running with a native ETS2/ATS is much easier, even if the programs you need have to be run via wine.
But actually that's not something SCS can fix. It's rather a problem of how proton handles things and that it doesn't provide an easy way to start multiple executables within the same prefix.
It can be made working though, it's just a lot of hassle.
PS: And yes, DX11 to DX12 is way easier than DX9 to DX11. That doesn't mean that DX12 "easy" port will squeeze all the potential DX12 has, not at all; but that means that the change is "easy" enough for developers to do it and never look back and keep for later the future improvements.
If you're talking about the lame-ass DX12 porting that basically is just DX11 with a new sticker on it, then that doesn't count in my opinion, since it won't give you any real advantage. Not in terms of performance, not in terms of features.

However, that wasn't even what we were talking about. The statement was that porting DX11 to DX12 is easier than DX11 to Vulkan and that makes only little sense.
Yes, you may have the advantage that you can reuse the same tools for development that you're familiar with, but regarding the APIs itself, I have never seen a statement by a credible person indicating that this is true (or at least significant).
Given that both are based on mantle and are almost like identical twins, sharing even a good portion of the wording in the the documentation:
https://twitter.com/renderpipeline/stat ... 7450007553

That's also the reason why Vulkan, DX12 (and also moltenVK) translate so easily into each other. The only real holdback there is the difference in development speed between them, with Vulkan lacking a bit behind in adding some of the extensions/features. (Which is why moltenvk is still catching up)
That's why I was asking for a credible source for that statement and got … nothing. Just some senseless "you're not cool enough for me to talk to you". Right …

Also makes me wonder why some devs (like Eagle Dynamics with DCS) made the choice of using Vulkan in the future if DX11->DX12 is so much easier? Why spend 5 years to develop Vulkan then?
And no, they're not considering a Linux port, they've stated that on their forum. So it'd make less sense for them than for SCS, who already have Linux ports of their games?
Some newbie driver
Posts: 7198
Joined: 12 Dec 2018 11:37

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#347 Post by Some newbie driver » 30 May 2023 00:35

Berniyh wrote: 29 May 2023 18:02If you're talking about the lame-ass DX12 porting that basically is just DX11 with a new sticker on it, then that doesn't count in my opinion, since it won't give you any real advantage. Not in terms of performance, not in terms of features.
No, I'm talking that both DX11 and DX12 use a similar "code philosophy" to call it someway. Things are done with both API on a similar enough way that you don't had to rethink the whole logic of your code when doing the port. So, conversions are "easier". On the contrary, DX9 and DX11 are absolutely different beasts. DX9 is too old and was based on programming paradigms that are absolutely out of use since time ago. Probably SCS had to code almost from scratch lots of whole sections of the code previously "tainted" with the DX9 presence on it.

And DX11 to DX12 is indeed a LOT easier than DX11 to Vulkan by the very fact that you will have all the support, documentation and tools that MS in their interest will provide to do that migration on a company that codes with those API. Of course there exist materials of that kind provided by Kronos Group for DX11 to Vulkan moves; but it will never be the same as the "Juan Palomo" that Microsoft can do with all their products.

If you look it from the point of view of a single person; maybe there's little difference. If you loot it from the point of view of a company that has to coordinate tens of coders plus other staff on a project spanning years and intertwined with lots of other ongoing changes. Then hell yeah; that's a BIG difference to have the kind of official support that MS will provide in order to keep things under its wings.

Regards
User avatar
JoeAlex23
Posts: 2268
Joined: 04 Dec 2016 03:24
Location: Dominican Republic
Contact:

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#348 Post by JoeAlex23 » 30 May 2023 01:35

Thank you for saving me the words, excellent explanation.

Is just logical to know that DX11 and DX12 are similar enough to not impose any problems to upgrade everything and many DX11 things still work the same way on DX12, while Vulkan works in a different way and you have to change a lot of things in the source code of the game engine to make it compatible, it would've less complex in some ways if SCS decided to ditch DX9 and just go straight to Vulkan since many things needed to be changed anyways to go from DX9 to DX11, but doing DX9 to DX11 and now DX11 to DX12 is a personal business decision from the CEO of SCS and it's safe to assume he knows what he is doing, doesn't matter how much we argue about it, nothing will change.

After the transition to DX12 is completed, which is what is holding most of the programmers from adding new features to the games, they can just assign a small team in the background to "translate" all the work done for DX12 to Vulkan with no rush (is not really hard for the right people, just very time consuming) and have both options available at some point.
Berniyh
Posts: 107
Joined: 24 Sep 2017 14:11

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#349 Post by Berniyh » 30 May 2023 16:16

Some newbie driver wrote: 30 May 2023 00:35
Berniyh wrote: 29 May 2023 18:02If you're talking about the lame-ass DX12 porting that basically is just DX11 with a new sticker on it, then that doesn't count in my opinion, since it won't give you any real advantage. Not in terms of performance, not in terms of features.
No, I'm talking that both DX11 and DX12 use a similar "code philosophy" to call it someway. Things are done with both API on a similar enough way that you don't had to rethink the whole logic of your code when doing the port. So, conversions are "easier". On the contrary, DX9 and DX11 are absolutely different beasts. DX9 is too old and was based on programming paradigms that are absolutely out of use since time ago. Probably SCS had to code almost from scratch lots of whole sections of the code previously "tainted" with the DX9 presence on it.

And DX11 to DX12 is indeed a LOT easier than DX11 to Vulkan by the very fact that you will have all the support, documentation and tools that MS in their interest will provide to do that migration on a company that codes with those API. Of course there exist materials of that kind provided by Kronos Group for DX11 to Vulkan moves; but it will never be the same as the "Juan Palomo" that Microsoft can do with all their products.

If you look it from the point of view of a single person; maybe there's little difference. If you loot it from the point of view of a company that has to coordinate tens of coders plus other staff on a project spanning years and intertwined with lots of other ongoing changes. Then hell yeah; that's a BIG difference to have the kind of official support that MS will provide in order to keep things under its wings.

Regards
Thanks for the explanation. I've actually spend quite some time finding an answer myself and most posts just say something along the lines of "doesn't really matter which one you pick". That's why I was asking about this.
Should note, that most of the discussions I found on the topic were about 3-5 years old and both APIs have significantly evolved since then. One of the main pro DX12 arguments back then was HLSL since conversion tools back then were not mature, but that should've improved since then.
Someone Mysterious
Posts: 72
Joined: 04 May 2019 09:13
Location: Denmark

Re: Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

#350 Post by Someone Mysterious » 31 May 2023 11:25

I do wonder whether it'll be DX12 or DX12 Ultimate.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dhrto, Piotr Kostrzewski and 9 guests