World of Warcraft Engine Updated to Support DX12, Adds 21:9 Cinematic Rendering

[Devastator0]

"Other changes include ditching Exclusive Fullscreen (now only windowed and borderless windowed modes are available) "

Why? That's counter intuative for performance.

Yeah, I'd want to know why they've made this move. I've always been under the impression that running a game at exclusive full screen = better performance. I don't know why exactly, but that's what I've always worked off.

 

[INSTG8R]

Yeah, I'd want to know why they've made this move. I've always been under the impression that running a game at exclusive full screen = better performance. I don't know why exactly, but that's what I've always worked off.

It would be something likely to break stuff like FreeSync/G-Sync tho it supposedly should work I wouldn’t bet on it.

 

[Sp33d Junki3]

This is more from Microsoft removing exclusive fullscreen mode from DX12
I've always played windowed FS when you have dual screens and make tabbing easier.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

Obviously you meant the original WoW graphics. The engine has been updated a few times to support high polygons, so it's still pretty taxing on weak cards.

LOL, what? The game has so crappy graphics even a fast phone could render it without problems. Adding Dx12 support seems like wasted effort.
Maybe if they increased the polygon count per scene to 200 instead, it would look a little better.

Gotta love the people that are so out of touch with the game that they think that the engine and graphics havent been updated since the launch of the game. You look like a fool.

I was quite surprised yesterday to see the 21:9 cinematic.

 

[Prima.Vera]

They should make the game Free-to-Play for the standard version at least....

 

[Sp33d Junki3]

LOL, what? The game has so crappy graphics even a fast phone could render it without problems. Adding Dx12 support seems like wasted effort.
Maybe if they increased the polygon count per scene to 200 instead, it would look a little better.

BFA updated the game details and over the years game has been improved.

They should make the game Free-to-Play for the standard version at least....

you can play for free upto lv20.
Buy BFA and get the whole game including vanilla and previous expansion.

 

[BumbleBee]

 

[RejZoR]

I don't understand how a modern API that operates closer to hardware operates worse than old generic one. I've been wondering this basically since DX12 was introduced. What's the point if basically what, 3 years since intorduction we have like 2 games that actually run faster and everything else just runs worse...

 

[Midland Dog]

I don't understand how a modern API that operates closer to hardware operates worse than old generic one. I've been wondering this basically since DX12 was introduced. What's the point if basically what, 3 years since intorduction we have like 2 games that actually run faster and everything else just runs worse...

d3d12 leaves all of the optimisation on the dev rather than the driver team

 

[RejZoR]

And no "fallback" mode like basically all DX versions had prior DX12 (where it ran the new API, but with feature sets of old ones)? That would mean in worst case, DX12 would just run as DX11...

 

[InVasMani]

Have you even played Legion with supersampling on and all sliders maxed? It looks pretty neat. + bonus points for 65-120 FPS in an MMO raiding with 25 people.

Even so, better threading will help the game in many ways, most notably player hubs and crowded raid fights where FPS can still go to sub 30s if people go wild and stack up.

View attachment 104056View attachment 104057

Those are the screenshots you provide and yet Ubisoft gets ****ing hell for downgraded graphics, but those blurry diarrhea stained "art style" graphics and disastrous game optimization gets Blizzard a free pass on the fanboi bus. How can a game that ugly be that CPU taxing honestly. I get that it was call "stylistic" when it launched it was low poly and low fidelity for a reason, but today come on really Mona Lisa I'm not buying it. Those WoW textures are downright gaudy as hell mixed w/over saturation.

The game engine is an absolute relic , wasted effort.

You miss the point it's a carrot on the stick game millions of idiots will buy it thinking DX12 improved the game graphically and for the majority since they are Nvidia users won't see any improvement at all! As a nice bonus though the DX12 will make it more accessible to the AMD users in case they couldn't run a decade old game that looks like "stylistic" rubbish!

Gotta love the people that are so out of touch with the game that they think that the engine and graphics havent been updated since the launch of the game. You look like a fool.

I was quite surprised yesterday to see the 21:9 cinematic.

I'm sure a Blizzy Stan could point out AB differences in detail, but it looks damn close to the same to everyone else. Still ugly AF. It's been updated so much that the marginally downgraded Ubisoft graphics that get hell and high water for god knows what reason looks superior to it! I'm impressed you sold me on it I'll skip it like the other WoW expansions!

 

[Vayra86]

Those are the screenshots you provide and yet Ubisoft gets ****ing hell for downgraded graphics, but those blurry diarrhea stained "art style" graphics and disastrous game optimization gets Blizzard a free pass on the fanboi bus. How can a game that ugly be that CPU taxing honestly. I get that it was call "stylistic" when it launched it was low poly and low fidelity for a reason, but today come on really Mona Lisa I'm not buying it. Those WoW textures are downright gaudy as hell mixed w/over saturation.

You miss the point it's a carrot on the stick game millions of idiots will buy it thinking DX12 improved the game graphically and for the majority since they are Nvidia users won't see any improvement at all! As a nice bonus though the DX12 will make it more accessible to the AMD users in case they couldn't run a decade old game that looks like "stylistic" rubbish!

Those are the screenshots I provide because they show a sense of scale that few other games have. Its a different style of game and for its 'lesser' graphics it offers some unique stuff in return. This has nothing to do with Ubisoft showing off Watch Dogs on an E3 with all sorts of advanced processing and effects in it, and then fails to put them in the game AND manages to release that game with abysmal performance.

Nobody contests it is an old engine and looks 'dated'. But what you get today is a huge step forward from what it used to be. Not many developers go to these lengths to improve an engine so fundamentally. And its not just the engine in a technical sense, which provides the performance leaps, but the addition and upgrades of particle effects and a pass for virtually ALL of the game's skills and spells, animations, etc etc etc.

And the stupid thing is, when you play this game (I've already quit again) it is actually much of the same vibe it always used to have. This game simply has soul and some extremely well crafted mechanics and the graphics + engine support that perfectly. Thát is why Blizzard games remain popular. They are like you say specific in their art direction and that goes much, much further than the # of polygons or texture res.

'Millions will buy it'... yes but not because of DX12. If you think that is a selling point for ANY game you've lost the plot. Your comment about looks and 'being so CPU taxing' also seems a bit weird. Graphics lean on GPU, and this game has more going on than GTA V at times to stress the CPU.

 

[Frick]

I'm sure a Blizzy Stan could point out AB differences in detail, but it looks damn close to the same to everyone else. Still ugly AF.

Then these people haven't really looked beyond that first second or so. Go and play on a Burning Crusade or so server, and then go and play the Blizzard servers and note the difference (especially the water). The art style is the same, and is admittedly not for everyone and puts people off.

The requirements for maxing out the game is silly though, that I agree on fo sho. But turn off the fancy stuff and you could - at least up to Warlords of Draenor - run it on a C2D and a GT520, and I know this because I did it.

I don't know if the updated system requirements are fair though,and you provably can get by on less, especially if you drop view distance. Also consider the minimum GPU requirements: GTX560, HD7850 and ... Intel 530? One of those ain't like the others.

 

[Vya Domus]

As a nice bonus though the DX12 will make it more accessible to the AMD users in case they couldn't run a decade old game that looks like "stylistic" rubbish!

This is WoW , shit runs on a integrated graphics. In what sort of scenario you would have an AMD card capable of DX12 that can't run the damn thing properly ?

 

[InVasMani]

This is WoW , shit runs on a integrated graphics. In what sort of scenario you would have an AMD card capable of DX12 that can't run the damn thing properly ?

It's probably for the APU's cheap as dirt to buld and with DX12 can possibly run it at 1080p acceptably. I mean they want to capitalize on some of that Fortnite cash daddy war $$$ cash it's a business they want new addicts. This is the drug you need do this quest here and subscribe for life and you will be rewarded!

 

[Easo]

WoW was never the best looking game even when it was released. But the salt is not in the pixel count, but the art style, which is one of the Blizzard's shticks in all their games. The game, honestly, does not look bad, plus it has to run on potatoes (though the minimum potato required right now is not so ancient at all).
Does it have optimisation issues? Yes and this is where the age is playing against them.

The game engine is an absolute relic , wasted effort.

It is not like the engine can be swapped so easily. With all the problems it is still quite an achievement to add DX12 to something from at least 2002 (if not 1999, WoW, IIRC, uses very heavily modified WarCraft III engine).
Their DX11 implementation, for example, actually improved performance AND graphics (lightning, as far as I can remember).

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

They should make the game Free-to-Play for the standard version at least....

Its free to play up to level 20. Blizzard just made the game where the battle chest is no longer a thing. Vanilla through Legion is base game and you just pay a sub now.

 

[Octopuss]

Obviously you meant the original WoW graphics. The engine has been updated a few times to support high polygons, so it's still pretty taxing on weak cards.

No.
Friend of mine was sitting right here, updating the game to the latest DLCs. It looks just as shitty as it did in 2004 - but back then it was acceptable.

edit:
I'm not even talking about the cartoon style, which I admittedly hate, but that's my personal taste and nothing else.
It's the complete emptiness of the game world, single colour ground textures, and for example, trees that are LITERALLY 100 polygons at most. Stuff like that.

 

[Fluffmeister]

any Bench is done?

Computer Base have upped some tests, nothing to get too excited about:

https://www.computerbase.de/2018-07...agramm-wow-directx-11-vs-directx-12-1920-1080

The main benefits for AMD users come from increased performance when using a lower end CPU of course:

https://www.computerbase.de/2018-07...sor-benchmarks-auf-einer-rx-vega-64-1920-1080

The magic sauce Nv put into their drivers from 337.5x means their DX11 performance puts the need for DX12 to bed.

 

[dirtyferret]

A nice farewell to legion expansion in pcgamer in case anyone wants to give the game (another) a try.

https://www.pcgamer.com/farewell-to-legion-world-of-warcrafts-best-expansion-in-a-decade/

 

[Xzibit]

Its interesting Nvidia isn't doing better in DX12 and is having issues considering they partner with Blizzard on WoW since 2004 & is their hardware sponsor at events like BlizzCon ever since.

 

[Pat1711]

"Other changes include ditching Exclusive Fullscreen (now only windowed and borderless windowed modes are available) "

Why? That's counter intuative for performance.

Considering that going from Fullscreen to Windowed Fullscreen has no impact on performance, it doesn't really matter does it? It used to mean something a few years ago but not for today's standards.

 

[bug]

Its interesting Nvidia isn't doing better in DX12 and is having issues considering they partner with Blizzard on WoW since 2004 & is their hardware sponsor at events like BlizzCon ever since.

Tbh the announcement doesn't say AMD does better in DX12 either. It says Nvidia takes a performance hit (though post #25 in this thread says otherwise).

 

[Xzibit]

Tbh the announcement doesn't say AMD does better in DX12 either. It says Nvidia takes a performance hit (though post #25 in this thread says otherwise).

Should have made it clear to what i was refering to. The benchamarks done on DX12.

On a Nvidia graphics card, however, there are major problems. If the player uses DirectX 12 for a GeForce, then not only is the frame rate worse than when using DirectX 11, but the game also keeps stalling and is therefore hardly playable.

There is also interesting discussions on the WoW forums and else where.

 

[Fluffmeister]

The lesson is... if it ain't broke, don't fix it.