Unreal DirectX 10 and 11 support

[Hyper]

http://kentie.net/article/d3d10drv/index.htm
http://kentie.net/article/d3d11drv/index.htm

Maybe something for Unreal 227 inclusion? (Or at least allow it in the package-check-signatures so you won't get booted off servers while using these)

[Smirftsch]

We know it, also Raven wanted to make a Unreal version of it.
I didn't want to include it to 227 since it doesn't offer very much (yet) over the current D3D9/OpenGL and would also mean another building site to work on. Also I currently don't want to leave XP as current stable and well known development platform to avoid having maybe new problems because of a new system setup. But D3D10/11 requires at least vista...

But any package can be easily whitelisted anytime, so I don't see much problems.

[Hyper]

We know it, also Raven wanted to make a Unreal version of it.
I didn't want to include it to 227 since it doesn't offer very much (yet) over the current D3D9/OpenGL and would also mean another building site to work on. Also I currently don't want to leave XP as current stable and well known development platform to avoid having maybe new problems because of a new system setup. But D3D10/11 requires at least vista...

But any package can be easily whitelisted anytime, so I don't see much problems.

If you mean manual whitelisting by the server owner, then it will generally not happen. Most admin won't take the effort to manually whitelist things like these so if it isn't whitelisted by default you can be sure you'll get kicked from most servers when you run these.

Rember: server admins are lazy people.  ;)

[Smirftsch]

yeah, but this would require at least "official" versions of this renderer to allow it in general.
New and upcoming versions wouldn't be covered also, which is the next problem since this renderer seems to be currently under progressive development.
Guess the lazy admins will have to do some work in any case

[Raven]

Too much work ATM to play with conversion but I do have plans to port it. Maybe within next two weeks I'll convert it and post so everyone could test it.

[Skw]

Cool.

How Unreal would look in DX11's tesselation?

[Hyper]

yeah, but this would require at least "official" versions of this renderer to allow it in general.
New and upcoming versions wouldn't be covered also, which is the next problem since this renderer seems to be currently under progressive development.
Guess the lazy admins will have to do some work in any case

You're right there. Inclusion of the new renders in 227 would be the only safe solution then imo. I can tell from years of experience as Unreal player that it is an impossible task to get admins into manually whitelist 3rd party add-ons. It's just not gonna happen. If things are not included then it won't be widely usable at clientside.

[Hyper]

(Upping this thread for hopefully continued attention)

[Hyper]

High resolution textures and lots of GPU-side processed effects such as DOF, motion blur, bloom, fog, smoke, etc. look "incompatible" with ultra low poly geometry of Unreal.  :P It's like emulating PSone with HD res but retaining the low res game content.

The mentioned renders do not have these features. They're just pretty standard renders with the advantage of modern hardware and software support and maybe a few minor features. Another advantage is the shorter rendering pipeline of DX10+ in comparison to DX9- which should result in slightly better performance with no downsides.

[GreatEmerald]

Not that you'd ever need more GPU performance in Unreal anyway.

[Hyper]

Too much work ATM to play with conversion but I do have plans to port it. Maybe within next two weeks I'll convert it and post so everyone could test it.

The next two weeks passed. Two months also passed. Any progress on the u227 conversion?

[Smirftsch]

I still lack a dx10 capable development system, but I think until 227g is out I won't have the time anyways...

[Raven]

Gives me lots of errors and I have my own projects I want to work on (thus lack of time to fix compilation errors).