Engine upgrade and DX12 coming to ETS2 and ATS!

[plykkegaard]

Sorry? You could check the supported versions

[Tomsun]

It's been said that many ETS2/ATS users are still on Windows 7 so even if dx12 actually helped with cpu performance it wouldn't matter because it's not supported in W7 (from my understanding).

Still, I think SCS's strategy to keep selling old games as new by renewing them but not too much not to break compatibility with old systems won't last forever if different branches are not created, but strategies are debatable, it's a choice

What means many? below 1% 5%, 10%, 25%, 50%, there will always be a critical value where it does not make any sense to avoid a step in modernization in respect to a minority.
You also have to analyze this group in detail.
Part A . Uses old hardware not capable to use more modern graphics engine, because they can't effort modern parts to upgrade their system to be capable of WIN 10 . This group also won't buy DLCs as the new ones needs more power and power.

Part B uses modern hardware fully potential to run Win 10/11, but they do just not want to upgrade due to several reasons. This group would be the smallest. As ETS2/ATS also runs under Linux and under MacOS its not a problem. The problem is to use a modernization strategy to cut off these OS. But the group is very small (But the ones who are buying DLCs)

So the Group of remaining Win7 users are economically not a reason not to upgrade the system. The only discussion is keep the system open for several OS or to go in a direction where in Future is only a MS way DX12,13 and no Vulcan or openGL. If it is to much manpower two maintain to Graphictypes, then the question should be "Why not choosing the open one instead of the proprietairy one". But its not the discussion "not to upgrade from DX11 to DX12", if the decision is only DX its the decision. The majority is using more or less up to date hardware with more or less up to date OS, capable to upgrade to DX12, and this is the group delivering the revenue for SCS.

[fratrac]

What means many?

I think the meaning of "many" is just relative to SCS's point of view even if your estimates make sense; "too many" I'd say.

Still, I agree about the fact that just keeping the old minimum requirements can't last forever if SCS chooses to keep its existing games alive and relevant instead of releasing new ones

[Tomsun]

What means many?

I think the meaning of "many" is just relative to SCS's point of view even if your estimates make sense; "too many" I'd say.

Still, I agree about the fact that just keeping the old minimum requirements can't last forever if SCS chooses to keep its existing games alive and relevant instead of releasing new ones

If SCS would go like LS we would have ETS22 now and the people complaining would stay on ETS12 and have no bugfixes since 10 years. i really doubt that the people not having a PC capable of DX12, would be customers buy the latest DLCs, or even having a permanent online connection. I'm NOT talking about the people beeing able to setup the latest 12th gen intel 1000W monster, but simply don't want to run a system capable of DX12, the just have to take the consequences of their decision.

So i don't say that there are not perhaps quite a lot of people in 3rd or 2nd world countries cannot affording modern computers beeing able to run DX12 titles, BUT i assume that they are irrelevant as customers. SCS would do better to let a certain old revision free of charge available to that group. This group also will not have fun in the latest renovations like Austria rebuild. Even with a setup ready for the step to DX12, it does not make much fun, thinking of doing this on my old T420 iGPU, not a good idea.

It was also a great Disaster moving from DX9 to DX11, where were all the problems nobody is talking about that anymore. If Someone is not willing to move from Win7, so that's His problem not ours.

More interesting is the question open or closed standard, despite the fact needed manpower i don't get the point what is against e.g. Vulcan, and if only one graphic system why DX12 and not Vulcan. From the technically perspective. If choosing only DX12, there is no way for Linux or MacOS am i right?

[xXCARL1992Xx]

If you have Plans to release on consoles IN the future Ofc you go DX12 because of Xbox, if you go Vulkan only you would need to implement 3 APIs just to cover all 3 consoles, but SCS has to implement Vulkan anyway, OpenGL is old and weak, for Linux Vulkan is the only way to go now and for macOS you need an Emulator anyway if you dont want to implement a 5. API

[Tomsun]

So Vulkan instead Open GL aside DX12. DX12 covering Xbox and Windows. Vulkan covering Windows, Linux, macOS via Emulator, PS via additional API. whats the third console Steamdeck?
Just for my understanding what are the downsides of Vulkan on DX12 on the PC? Or are they at least equal and just two different technologies?

[xXCARL1992Xx]

Nintendo and PlayStation use their own proprietary API each, i dont know about Nintendo but Sonys is a Frankensteins Monster between APis, taken something from here, then from there and making it work

Steamdeck uses Valves Proton Engine or Vulkan/OpenGL, there is no work needed from SCS side

[Some newbie driver]

Just for my understanding what are the downsides of Vulkan on DX12 on the PC? Or are they at least equal and just two different technologies?

On the very basic and generic description, Vulkan allows for a lower level access to hardware, what reduces middle-ware bloat and increases overall performance. But that will depend only on the skill of the developers in leveraging that possibility. While DX12 is a higher level abstraction "ready to be use" that frees the developer to bother of lots of details at the cost of way less fine tuning and raw power squeezing possibilities.

Some who develops with them or has at least general developer expertise could give you more insight about how they work and other details; but their very basic philosophy of working is that one.

Regards

[xXCARL1992Xx]

DX12 is just as low level an API as Vulkan is, the difference is one is proprietary and bound to Windows/Xbox while Vulkan is free to use on al platforms that support it (and MS is also on in the consortium that makes the implementation decisions)

[plykkegaard]

Yep also what I've read
DX12 offers low level acces to core api to benefit from the cpus multicore achitecture