Very unlikely. You have to differentiate between high-level operating system APIs like Core Animation or Core Graphics, which in turn call lower-level APIs like OpenGL or, in the future, Metal (which in turn operate on a driver level).Come the Fall will El Capitan boost ESO performance off the bat?
It's very likely that ESO will continue using OpenGL for the time being. It's also very likely that OS X 10.11 will introduce new OpenGL driver versions, which might include new quirks. This would have to be addressed in minor patches. If you don't want this kind of trouble, don't be an early adaptor (we've seen what happened after the introduction of Yosemite).You think ESO will have compatibility issues?
That's a question only the team can answer. As I said above, the effort would have to be justified, and rewriting a renderer to make use of a new API is not done quickly. Remember that Metal will be exclusive to 10.11, and that it won't be backported to older versions of OS X. So the initial install base will be very small. Of course it will grow over time, but older machines with older versions of OS X would still need to be supported.Will ZOS continue Mac development to take advantage of Metal and how long before we see any benefit from it?
Using the 3rd party FaceFX library does not depend on Metal. It's a multi-platform library which makes use of OpenGL (among other APIs). The reason we haven't seen it yet is that the OpenGL version the ESO renderer uses needs to be raised from the current 2.1 version to the newer 4.1, to accommodate for various needs (e.g. higher amount of animated parts, etc.).Will Metal allow Mac to finally have the new character facial animations PCs have had for some time now?
@emotionrays, that's interesting to know. I'll have to check whether I'm still a member of the paid developer program, and if so, I'm down for a little creative testing.
Well, I seriously doubt that anyone can make a precise prediction this early in time. Metal hasn't even been released yet officially, but surely it's here to stay. It's all about adaption rates, difficulty or ease of code migration, cost/benefit ratio, and of course, demand. Of the last thing mentioned, there is ample supply already, it seems.So if I distill everything that is said in above posts, ESO most likely will never take advantage of the benefits of Metal in its life cycle?
Absolutely. But like anything, it's mostly a matter of time and resources. Almost all MMOs, at least the ones I know, have got upgrades to their graphical engines over the course of their respective lifetimes, adapting newer technologies (not "bleeding edge", but newer than the ones they originally started out with). After all, they need to stay where the bulk of their audience is.Assuming ESO really achieves critical and commercial acclaim (I think ESO is still in its first era of growing pains) will there ever be a true ESO 2.0 (I remember lots of mention of an eventual 64 bit version last year)? Would/could an ESO 2.0 contain updated code to use Metal?
Well, I see it as @emotionrays correctly said, technology is best used to achieve a certain goal, and not as an end to itself. I've explained here why there is no immediate advantage to be had automatically from compiling a program in 64-bit instead of 32-bit. It's not as if flipping a compilation target switch suddenly makes things twice as performant as before (although we might wish for it to be, of course ).I would assume a 64 bit version would greatly improve performance and experience for many (regardless of a 32 bit bug free version).
Well, there has been a lot of articulate conversation about what we might/could/should/would/can expect and all, I was going to reply to specifics and decided that was too much like work. Instead, I thought I would just try it and see how El Capitan runs ESO rather than worrying about hypotheticals.
My machine is sort of a newer iMac, I say sort of since it is a home-brew PC (i5 with 8 GB ram, 1TB/256GB fusion drive, nVidia 760) and running as a Hackintosh. I installed EL Capitan yesterday and that discovered everything so far works fine - so far. ESO, as was mentioned by an earlier post has an issue with the launcher which aborts with a host_authfail error.
However, opening the application and running the game directly works fine.
My finding was that in running on the NA server in Vulkhel guard my FPS this morning in running between 45 and 60 FPS. I have a nVidia 760 and "normally" running in Yosemite I will get between 35 and 50 FPS. Running around outside of town my FPS was running around 85 to 95 FPS.
It would seem that for my one data point there was a 20% or so improvement in performance - however, we need more data points at different times during the day to see if that difference holds up.
06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/gold/backgrounds/bg-cover01.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/single/icons.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Accept queue size of (2) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/gold/plate-extended.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/gold/plate-games-news.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Extracting skin file (locale.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Extracting skin file (workflow.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (en-us) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (de-de) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 http://127.0.0.1:50141/applications.js (1961): ---- Setting loaded ---- 06/13/2015 19:54:23 http://127.0.0.1:50141/applications.js (2471): -=- Version: 1134543 06/13/2015 19:54:23 http://127.0.0.1:50141/applications.js (2489): ------- Branch: live ------- 06/13/2015 19:54:23 http://127.0.0.1:50141/applications.js (2490): ------- Type: public ------- 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Extracting skin file (locale.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Extracting skin file (locale.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/gold/plate-settings.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading interop library (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libdownloader.dylib) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading interop library (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libpatcher.dylib) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading interop library (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libMinSpecDetectionInterop.dylib) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (en-us) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (de-de) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Response code set [/images/gold/progress-bar.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Extracting skin file (analytics.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Library validation (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libpatcher.dylib) failed 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Library validation (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libdownloader.dylib) failed 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Library validation (/Applications/Zenimax Online/Launcher.app/Contents/MacOS/libMinSpecDetectionInterop.dylib) failed 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (en-us) 06/13/2015 19:54:23 Loading localization (de-de) 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/images/gold/progress-bar-fill.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:24 http://127.0.0.1:50141/applications.js (1890): -=- Region: EU 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Extracting skin file (locale.json) 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Loading localization (en-us) 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Loading localization (de-de) 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/images/gold/progress-bar-glow.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Accept queue size of (3) 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/fonts/RoboCondensed_bold.woff:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/images/gold/dropdown-open.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/images/gold/dropdown-bottom.png:200:0] 06/13/2015 19:54:24 Response code set [/fonts/RoboCondensed_regular.woff:200:0] 06/13/2015 20:01:13 Unsupported cursor (move) using default instead. To implement this cursor add move.png to the Resources directory 06/13/2015 20:29:47 Unsupported cursor (move) using default instead. To implement this cursor add move.png to the Resources directory
@KhajitFurTrader thanks for the responses, you know Mac well. Putting Metal discussion aside, how certain is a 64 bit version of ESO? I remember a lot of buzz surrounding a 64 bit version last year when the game was suffering through the memory leaks and all that. Now stability is greatly improved (thanks Chris and team). So is a 64 bit ESO still on the table if the 32 bit version has been polished up?
I would assume a 64 bit version would greatly improve performance and experience for many (regardless of a 32 bit bug free version).
Wow, thanks for the thorough response Chris. Wish you the best on working towards GL 4.1. Can't wait to try ESO when that's up and running.@KhajitFurTrader thanks for the responses, you know Mac well. Putting Metal discussion aside, how certain is a 64 bit version of ESO? I remember a lot of buzz surrounding a 64 bit version last year when the game was suffering through the memory leaks and all that. Now stability is greatly improved (thanks Chris and team). So is a 64 bit ESO still on the table if the 32 bit version has been polished up?
I would assume a 64 bit version would greatly improve performance and experience for many (regardless of a 32 bit bug free version).
64bit apps are supposed to run about 10% faster then 32bit apps on OSX.
( We are told, but have not tested this yet ourselves )
We are not currently planning on doing a Metal version of ESO.
Theres a few issues with Metal right now.
1. It is beta, there will be bugs etc.
2. It does not run on PCs. PC graphic team currently helps debug GL issues on their PCs.
3. We would have to raise the OSX system requirement higher then 10.9.
4. We have a 80% functional GL 4.1 renderer now. It is much easier to update to newer OpenGL then move to an entirely new system, plus rewrite all the shaders again.
5. Moving to GL 4.1 will open up a bunch of speed improvement options for ESO plus better looking graphics. Example we can draw the grounds in 1 pass vs 2, we can use a geometry shader to create ground on the GPU vs uploading meshes, we will have more find grained control over lighting and shine on objects. We can pass more data to the GPU shaders in 1 command vs 100.
Sometime after Metal ship on OSX and the bugs are generally worked out we will look at what it would take to move to it in the long term. Currently Apple is not killing off OpenGL 4.1 anytime soon, even if they decide to stop upgrading it.
Also Vulkan https://www.khronos.org/vulkan spec is supposed to ship this year.
Apples on the design board for that.
Vulkan is based on Mantle which is AMDs API that is probably 95% the same as Metal.
Our guess is that Vulkan might sit on top of Mantle and Metal drivers.
That would be the best cross platform way to handle things down the road.
That is exactly what it is made for.
Code once run on all platforms at high speed.
This info comes from metal driver availability, not from real test
Metal supported card families:
Nvidia – GeForce gtx 4xx and newer
Intel – HD4000 and newer (ivy bridge and newer)
AMD – HD7000 and newer
For those who try to change their version number in /System/Library/CoreServices/systemversion.plist to try to trick the Launcher into thinking your are on 10.10.4, you cannot do this as there is no "real" root user in El Capitan... yet. Root users allow you to override all permissions to change critical files such as /systemversion.plist. It is dangerous to do this and can even render your Mac unbootable, so please don't try this at all [if they do adjust root user permissions].
No, what any MMO wants is to support the widest possible range of machines that are out there. Metal will be supported only on a fraction of machines that support OS X El Capitan in the first place. No MMO needs cutting edge graphics per sé, e.g. even WoW doesn't offer "cutting edge" AA options on the Mac right now (6.2). Not a single customer would change games primarily over graphics features, but because of gameplay features or issues.Isn't this what any MMO game wants to keep their game cutting edge and keep users coming back. If not how will other MMO's that support metal faster compare and how many people will eso loss to them
ESO isn't a port, it never was. It's a genuine OS X binary, compiled from a common code base. It would be a logistical nightmare to develop for every platform separately, and no software developer in their right mind would do otherwise unless forced.My last comment ESO has to decide how they want to continue, Ported games never hold there ground in long term all the good lasting ones develop for each platform.
My last comment ESO has to decide how they want to continue, Ported games never hold there ground in long term all the good lasting ones develop for each platform.
I will admit I don't know the in's and outs of ESO structure, but I know from posts in here, there updater is not written in house and they cannot make changes themselves. In those same threads they refer to it as a port. They could be wrong, I have no clue what the code looks like.
Easy, just search for the posts of @chris.dillman in this forum. Chris has been very forthcoming about the nitty and gritty details of development in the past, which I greatly appreciate.I would love to learn more FACTS on ESO development if anyone has them and are able to share.
RE Chris speaking about Vulkan coming up and Apple's membership, apparently, Apple's creation of Metal is their way of kicking Vulkan to the curb. Apple have thus far not made a mention of Vulkan support in OS X so I doubt that will actually be coming any time soon. Not before 10.12 anyway.