this is all true, but speed upgrades arent a big deal to me. they are expected in an update. bleeding edge features dont always make the cut though and im glad in dx11 they did and apparently work properly as well unlike dx10

What is that "power" you see behin Lite-C? I fail to see this being an all selling feature. Sure it's not crap but let's do the comparison to e.g. Unity. There you have Javascript and C#. Both more or less are general and popular languages (although as I understand it Unity's Javascript has minor differences) with great editors available and of course lots of good documentation and tutorials. This also covers one sort of easy language and one more advanced language. In terms of difficulty / complexity I don't see Lite-C being too far away from something like C#...

That's why I don't see the benefit (and Unity isn't the only engine out there offering an easy script language and a more complex C language be it C# or C++). I actually tend to see Lite-C as a disadvantage for 3DGS. In my opinion it would have been better to introduce an easy scripting language rather than creating Lite-C and leave the option for e.g. C++ for the pros. Especially as 3DGS tends to be an engine for newbies and lone wolves this probably would have been the better choice in the long run. Well sure there were things like that Atari cooperation but I have to say I never heard anything at all concerning Lite-C and Atari besides the initial news about the partnership...

Concerning DX11 for 3DGS I actually tend to agree with jcl. It's nice to have but currently of no great importance (even AAA usually titles don't feature it recently and don't count in stuff like AVP 3 or Crysis 2 where the DX11 support is barely existant and consists pretty much of "We use tesselation here and there")...

"In my opinion it would have been better to introduce an easy scripting language rather than creating Lite-C and leave the option for e.g. C++ for the pros. "


This would create a too big hole. I, myself, would never ever ever use a language that would be much simpler than liteC, also C++ is too hard on the other side.

LiteC is great!

(also,i dont care for dx11/android)

Same here, personally I don't even care for console support. Imagine A8/ A9 supported consoles, then you still had to become an official XBox/PS3/Wii developer and I highly doubt that many games would make it there. We all know how difficult it is to complete a single PC game. Android (/iPhone) would have been a good platform for indie developers ~2 years ago, but today it's just overcrowded.

My wishes for the (near) future: New WED, new homepage, new art assets, new (additional) Gamestudio developer (maybe even rehire Marco Grubert, I cannot remember why he has left).

I think that's more important than DX11.

actually superku, i never played your game but i watched some videos, and your game would probably be a great xbox live/tablet/smartphone game. if wii becomes indie friendly ever, than using the accelerometer in the wiimote/phone/tablet seems like it would be a fun involvement. again never played though, just from what the gameplay looked like.

More batches per frame, direct access to the depthbuffer, extended HLSL and lots of other cool things are in my opinion worth a month of work. It however should not replace DirectX 9 but should be usable alternatively, which could also lead to a clean abstraction needed for OpenGL ES 2.0, which then also shouldn´t be too much work, except the shader system, but then one could maybe just assign two effects to a material and the correct one is then used depending on the renderer.
Btw, to the shader haters around here: Did you know that you can´t render anything in OpenGL ES 2.0 without shaders?
The really big problem there however is probably Lite-C... It would have to compile to another or even several other architectures. Or it needs to be parsed and executed at runtime, which however will most probably take quite some speed out of it. So maybe no Lite-C on Android?

I just see more potential in DirectX11 than in Android support. A new WED however is anyways the most important at the moment and some good way to debug Lite-c...
Also, wasn´t there somewhen the request to implement PerfHUD support? Should be easily implemented (I am however not sure if it is a good idea to have it always usable.) und would help a lot if it comes to more complex rendering techniques.

Crysis2 had no DX11 until 2 days ago. Crytek delivered the DX11 update, with some really nice effects. For example local Realtime reflections.
[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osIj6qbXY5g[/video]


Greetings
Rackscha

What's that realtime local reflection thing about? That's nothing new (just a mirror, right?)

Which afaik is no DX11 relevant feature though. At least I read a posting which was quite convincing and concluded, that tesselation is the only real DX11 feature - all the other things (which unfortunately often make next to no visual difference to the DX9 shaders) all were possible with DX10...

That's why I made my point: Most AAA titles don't support DX11 in the first place and many of those which technically do just use a feature like tesselation so they can put the DX11 stickers on their titles...

The first game that really makes use of DX11 might be Battlefield 3 as they seem to really have integrated it in the engine rather than using it as an "update" or small "add-on" here and there...

As Frank already pointed out, DX11 is not used in current games as those still need to support DirectX 9 for Xbox360.
Also I don´t see it as a reason against DirectX11, that it isn´t yet widely used in current games...
But if jcl decides to focus on other things in the near future, I can´t change that anyway, and I also am not sure if I want to, as he most probably has good reasons for his decisions.