NOt good points of you actually look at teh work being done. It's just that in DX10 mode, we'd get slightly different (lower) framerates compared to DX11 counterpart with no loss in quality. But Unigine guys here are doing it the other way around just to prove the point. More poly's where you need them and less where you don't. It's in level of detail that you can do without significant performance hit. The point of tessellation is not in making one version flat and another detailed. So i'm sure DX11 can do much more than just this with far more justifiable effects that could all be done with good old parallax mapping. And you don't even need DX10 hardware for that. The level of detail and the way everything is shaded is just unbelievable. Just look at the Crysis screenshots above, the shore with loads of stones.
Plus this thing looks so damn cartoonish it's not even pleasing to my eyes at all. I don't know, is it just me or they're trying to sell us DX11 the way NVIDIA was trying to sell us PhysX ? I get the exactly same impression. Do we really need DX11 and expensive new hardware just to see those corners stones sticking out? Or roof tops not being completely flat? Depth of field looks like awful view distance fog in old games and the random blurring all over the scene makes it 10 times worse. There probably was, but nothing significant.
It looks just as good and i had not noticeable performance hit. I've seen 3D cobblestones done with parallax mapping in Crysis. Cobble stones are flat, those corner stones are flat, roof is flat, depth of field is a joke and all the blurring makes me wanna puke. I'm not thrilled by this tech demo in any way. Interesting how much of a hit 8xAA caused at all resolutions.