If your program doesn't use any proprietary software, library, dlls or simply code from others, then yes, it is free. DirectX is proprietary. You don't need SDK to write DirectX calls, you need the library. You need license to use these proprietary libraries. Without them, your code won't run.I just read my DirectX SDK license. It clearly states that I have the right to distribute my software. The only limitations it puts on it is it must be clearly marked as my own software, it can't use M$ logos or appear to be a M$ product, M$ is not liable for any damages as a result of my software, I can not distribute software that is intended to damage or otherwise compromise the system it is installed on, and it must be for the Windows platform. It does not state that the license is for non commercial use only. There is definitely no commercial limitation put on the software I make using the SDK.
Well, those are just the screen shots I have on hand, it isn't like I recorded me playing. I got a few screen shots showing the difference between Tess off and Tess normal since so many claim there is no difference. This game goes the Crysis way - there is tessellation everywhere, opinions on over-tessellations aside. From brick walls, trees, to cobble stone walk ways - all tessellated.of course you get high gpu usage in the benchmark since there is no framerate cap there.
btw you are running DX11? so are you going to claim DX11 runs fine for you?
I use V-synch and Triple Buffering via Riva Tuner's overrider. The combination of DX11 + PhysX on High keeps my system on it's toes. I get 80%+ GPU usage and 50%+ load on my PhysX Card.@Railraven: Force vsync on in the driver and tell us what your GPU load is then.
How do I know that Valve's cut didn't also include the secret percentage The Illuminati collect for their "world domination" slush fund? I hate to be snarky, but do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? None of what you propose is documented anywhere. It can be confirmed by no one. You're basically proposing a conspiracy theory at this point.How did you know the cut from Valve did not include the cut from MS?
I'm going to say this one last time: you're the one making the extraordinary claim. The onus of proof is on you because you're the person who claims status quo is not true. That's the entire basis of the "extraordinary claims" maxim.Anyways, this is far better than forum quotes. I believe it can be a strong evidence, but cannot be used as a proof. I, on the other hand, was asked for a proof, or retract my statement. Why did not you address my inquiry since my first post to you?
You do realize what you just quoted proves my point, right? The article specifically notes that only consoles have license fees. (The bit about homebrew is also for consoles; homebrew by definition is software created for closed systems without the approval of the system's guardian)My turn for evidence...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_video_game_development
I don't think traditionally financially more accessible means free. The cut to Valve is not we are talking about, the cost of tools also not what we are talking about, we are talking specifically cuts towards MS.
Oh for God's sake just give it up.In that case, supply proofs to your claims, you made quite a few.
sorry but the game is just not smooth in DX11 for antbody from what I can tell. the hitches are quite annoying and framerates can change way too drastically for it to be worth using. and I do not see how drivers could fix it since it seems to be a game problem.
and I have fired the game up in DX11 and do not see any difference except in a few spots that use tessellation. maybe I need to look a little harder but I would love to see a direct comparison to DX9.
thanks for the pics and yeah its noticeable there but really the textures are so blurry that tessellation does not add much in the end. maybe forcing AF may help since the game does not seem to use it. I know it cleared up some areas when I forced it but low res texures are still in mant places so that cant be overcome. the streets look great though in DX9 or DX10 and do not appera to ned any AF like other parts of the game do.
Yeah, the pictures are blurry for two reasons:
1) I used Afterburner to screen capture (even on high quality I'm not impressed with the capture quality)
2) I was using the Batscope or whatever you want to call it haha. Where you pretty much zoom into first person view, and only objects in the direct center stay in focus.
I tried my best to focus on the Tessellation parts of the images (ie zooming in.)
I guess nVidia beta drivers are out - hopefully they improve DX11 somewhat for team green. I'm still hoping Rocksteady themselves do something about the horrid performance.
Well I can see some difference in those images.
Game is unplayable for me under DX11, maybe it is related to my resolution, I see Toyota is saying the same though. A lot of people are just not even bothering and waiting to see if they fix it.
I can't see them just leaving the game as it is now for DX11, it's a mess and runs horribly in relation to the graphics not being very impressive at all.
Physx is not working perfectly but its okay I guess. besides the interactive fog/smoke, its still not the least bit impressive to me.But you don't whine about PhysX anymore, so I take it that is working fine?
There are new Beta Drives from nVIdia, you can give them a shot and see if they help. The DX11 code path is clearly borked some where or they reached too high with Tessellation with current hardware.Well I can see some difference in those images.
Game is unplayable for me under DX11, maybe it is related to my resolution, I see Toyota is saying the same though. A lot of people are just not even bothering and waiting to see if they fix it.
I can't see them just leaving the game as it is now for DX11, it's a mess and runs horribly in relation to the graphics not being very impressive at all.
I do not understand what their point of fooling with DX11 was in the first place. they never really discussed what features we would have or even showed what the differences would look like. on top of that, its clear they never even played the game for 1 minute in DX11 or they would have noticed the issues. I just do not get why or how some companies operate like that.
Physx is not working perfectly but its okay I guess. besides the interactive fog/smoke, its still not the least bit impressive to me.
Here is the link to the x64 win7 beta drivers.
There is no direct mention of Batman, but I noted x79 issues are being addressed.
GeForce 290.36 Driver
http://www.geforce.com/Drivers/Results/40030
Updates PhysX System Software to version 9.11.11.07 for the best PhysX experience in Batman: Arkham City.
Let me straight up my inquiry. First, I am not clear to which that cut from valve is about. If it is simply digital distribution, then it has nothing to do with MS. I said that because I don't know, not because I know, it was a question. After reading a bit, I don't think valve checks all submissions on infringment of IPs, so I edited the post to ask if your friend check the licensing on libraries that he used. It has nothing to do with Illuminati. The Illuminati part is somehow my original bolded question is ignored, the one you said you don't know what I am asking about. I came back to this point almost every single post, but it seems it was invisible somehow.How do I know that Valve's cut didn't also include the secret percentage The Illuminati collect for their "world domination" slush fund? I hate to be snarky, but do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? None of what you propose is documented anywhere. It can be confirmed by no one. You're basically proposing a conspiracy theory at this point.
I am sure that this is not going to be the last time. My claim is the exact opposite of yours, which I have defined many many post ago. I said, the required license is not free, you said it is. Isn't fair that we both try to get proofs? Or evidence to support this claim? I have no problem searching for evidence for a debate. I have a problem with the "Solid proof or retract" attitude. Tell me you missed that too.I'm going to say this one last time: you're the one making the extraordinary claim. The onus of proof is on you because you're the person who claims status quo is not true. That's the entire basis of the "extraordinary claims" maxim.
No, I don't realize that. I explicitly bolded what is important. We both realized that there is an extra charge on consoles which you describe is due to a "close" system. Then you go on with computer is "Open".... Well, that is an assumption. The key bolded words are that indie programmers use homebrew developement libraries, again, new terms, but I don't think directX related libraries are homebrew.You do realize what you just quoted proves my point, right? The article specifically notes that only consoles have license fees. (The bit about homebrew is also for consoles; homebrew by definition is software created for closed systems without the approval of the system's guardian)
I thought we had agreed on that somewhere around post 371. Just to by precise, I know you are looking for evidence in terms of money, and I already told you I couldn't prove it on post 371. You agreed about the need of licensing on 372. I said, lets resolve the Dx issue first before building your argument based on an assumption that it is indeed free.
How did you know the cut from Valve did not include the cut from MS? Did your friend check and see if libraries s/he that is IP of some other identify used do not need extra licensing?
http://www.valvesoftware.com/legal.html
Anyways, this is far better than forum quotes. I believe it can be a strong evidence, but cannot be used as a proof. I, on the other hand, was asked for a proof, or retract my statement. Why did not you address my inquiry since my first post to you?
My turn for evidence...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_video_game_development
I don't think traditionally financially more accessible means free. The cut to Valve is not we are talking about, the cost of tools also not what we are talking about, we are talking specifically cuts towards MS.
About it for Batman:
But it could be a PhysX issue that is causing awful DX11 performance? Worth a shot.
Proof? Does it not obvious that ViRGE friend also BELIEVE it is free but probably never verify it? There is a difference between "Why should I pay?" vs "Well I acquired the appropriate licenses for free, or terms that doesn't cost money." Am I picking bones out of an egg here? Or is that just an opinion from a Indie programmer?oh come on just admit it you are wrong.
virge even prove it there are no cost using direct X library. please give us prove that valve cut include M$ license fee if not just admit it you are wrong
Ditto. Glad I saw the thread, even more glad the game was only $20. If there's a third I think I might wait until it's in the bargain bin.I don't think its the physx, there are the usual unreasonable slowdowns when some smoke comes round, but it feels like it is the game and something to do with DX11 when I try to play.
Ah, it looks like they do know DX11 is totally broken and are going to fix it. For now they say to play the game in DX9. Not ideal for a single player game you generally play once and put away. I am just putting it on hold to see if they can fix the DX11 mess.
http://community.batmanarkhamcity.com/forums/showthread.php/10585-PC-DirectX-11-Issues-Please-Read?
Could be a long wait, I think GFWL has similar certification wait times as the 360 does.
I don't think its the physx, there are the usual unreasonable slowdowns when some smoke comes round, but it feels like it is the game and something to do with DX11 when I try to play.
Ah, it looks like they do know DX11 is totally broken and are going to fix it. For now they say to play the game in DX9. Not ideal for a single player game you generally play once and put away. I am just putting it on hold to see if they can fix the DX11 mess.
http://community.batmanarkhamcity.com/forums/showthread.php/10585-PC-DirectX-11-Issues-Please-Read?
Could be a long wait, I think GFWL has similar certification wait times as the 360 does.
About it for Batman:
But it could be a PhysX issue that is causing awful DX11 performance? Worth a shot.
The problem is that the entire basis of your claim is "prove me wrong or I must be right". We've been over this: you can't absolutely disprove something that does not exist. There is literally no way (logically speaking) that I could ever satisfactorily prove the non-existence of something, because you could always propose a new theory to explain the lack of proof. Logic aside, at this point I do not believe you could ever be satisfied with a response even if Steve Ballmer submitted it in writing, so I'd love to know what proof it would take to make you happy.I am sure that this is not going to be the last time. My claim is the exact opposite of yours, which I have defined many many post ago. I said, the required license is not free, you said it is. Isn't fair that we both try to get proofs? Or evidence to support this claim? I have no problem searching for evidence for a debate. I have a problem with the "Solid proof or retract" attitude. Tell me you missed that too.
Again, free as in beer is not free as in speech. Proprietary means it is not free as in speech; proprietary can still be (and in this case is) free as in beer.To me, proprietary means it is not free. To you, if it is proprietary to MS that operates upon windows, then it is free after purchasing windows.
Homebrew only applies to consoles. I explained this before. You're trying to take a concept from consoles (a closed system) and apply it to computers.No, I don't realize that. I explicitly bolded what is important. We both realized that there is an extra charge on consoles which you describe is due to a "close" system. Then you go on with computer is "Open".... Well, that is an assumption. The key bolded words are that indie programmers use homebrew developement libraries, again, new terms, but I don't think directX related libraries are homebrew.
Proof? Does it not obvious that ViRGE friend also BELIEVE it is free but probably never verify it? There is a difference between "Why should I pay?" vs "Well I acquired the appropriate licenses for free, or terms that doesn't cost money." Am I picking bones out of an egg here? Or is that just an opinion from a Indie programmer?