You can see it on their blog. The ISO committee has validated C++0x as a new standard. Their planning on publishing it by the end of 2011 just so they can call it C++11 (kinda like c89 and c99).

In itself I don't think it will affect the development of the new version in anyway. But having it adopted as a standard, can only enhance its adoption and its common use.

I'm glad to see C++ evolving. Though I have to say I don't know where they're headed. I just cannot see the global image. But I'm no expert, and I'll let the people who know more talk about it.

:)
It's Herb Sutter's blog, not their. Just a stupid nitpick.
Looking at the history of C++, its fights with other languages for share (like Java) and its criticism from above and below (Garbage collection from above, C's simplicity from below) gives a great amount of important history to go over whether you want to think of C++ as a viable for you language, or not.
The most important design goal for C++ (which I believe defines what type of language it really is) is that it provides abstractions without sacrificing performance, at least when you don't use the feature.
One controversial aspect of C++ is that a lot of code has been written in it, so from my stance, I really don't know whether people continue using so that they don't lose previous effort, or whether they use it because they like it. A survey may be in need here.
One share of the industry repeatedly choose C++, and that is the industrial game development businesses. They have effectively used it to target game consoles, PC games, amongst other mobile gaming platforms (ObjectiveC doesn't enjoy a big departure from the design goals of C++, which may be a symptom of "Not Created Here").

In all cases, I think people around these areas (especially those knees deep into "Web Development", the "Old New Fad") don't appreciate C++ enough. I'm just glad to see those lambda's make their way (although with a little bit of noise on top of them) into C++.
I am not sure about the transition of the game industry to actually adapt and use c++11.
Being really focused on bit optimization, adding an abstraction layer is not what these type of dev really want.
Boost exists since ages, but I do not see major game engines using it.
Core game dev tend to re-invent the wheel with every engine, and speaking from experience (although small) a game developer would rather code and optimize in C as much as possible rather than use C++.
But C++ is used because of OOP, that was its basic use from game dev perspective.

first thing an engine developer does is to actually implement his own memory map, so I do not see c++11 from the list of features seeing any light in terms of game dev. In other areas, yes, it makes sense to use it.

Edit:
you can actually feel it in the diff threads in gamedev.net, but what I stated above is a mere personal opinion.
I would not use c++11 if I am developing a core game engine (Unreal, CryEngine, etc..) as in my experience too, most core engines do not even use STL.

So in my humble opinition, does c++11 make sense?
From a game dev perspective: in general no, but some small feature might be like delegation, final (in overrides), maybe new unrestricted unions. Need to check new multitasking memory model and new garbage collection implementations but in all I just see the small parts being used not the full global picture (solution).

in any case some people would disagree with me: https://github.com/OniLink/Terra-Game-Engine
I don't really know what you're talking about.
Unreal Engine's core was written in C++.
There's also Irrlicht and Ogre on the open source side.

Game programmers don't usually dwell optimizing for bits, at least not most of them.
STL's generic implementations might not be well suited for professional games, but its design is decent. That's why EASTL was written.

C++03 and I guess before that as well allows overriding the new operator, giving you complete control over allocation, and deallocation (implicitly with delete).

C++'s moto is abstraction "without" an impact on performance. So if you use polymorphism, it's because you would have implemented it on your own, had to debug it, and had to up keep with all the additional separation from the community.

C++ is not only an OOP extension over C. It also has template (generic programming) paradigms implemented to it which some deem even more important that OOP. They are orthogonal concepts (you don't need to go OOP to go templates or vice versa)

What you posted is a perfect counter example to what you were saying.

I think that any one man's personal experience is not enough to make a judgement about the industry. What matters most are people that go behind real commercial products that are being developed industrially.

Some other notes:
- DirectX is developed to be naturally used in C++. Most games are developed against the DirectX API (specifically, D3D).
- C++ provides abstraction without an impact on performance if you don't use the features. It's a pick and choose game.
- C++ is used more widely in game development company's than C. Check any game programming job listing.
You can develop games with XNA too but that does not mean it is the way to go.
I said before it is my personal opinion and the examples I listed are for people with different opinions.

Of course C++ is the most used language in Game Dev. and game engines. But I was saying "without the features". So I am not sure how fast will the adoption of c++11 will be in the game industry.

And mentioning Ogre/Irrelicht and Unreal in the same sentence is wrong in so many ways, probably 700k USD wrong.
Comparing Open Source and Closed Source based on price tag is wrong. A nitpick: I mentioned each in their respective sentences. BTW, Irrlicht and Ogre each has an estimated "development" cost of $9M and $14M respectively (according to ohloh.net).

If we already have established that C++ is well used in the industry (for either history (legacy code) and relevance reasons), what would hinder C++11 adoption exactly?

Lambda expressions in C++ do not have more overhead than using a Functor (class that acts as a function (class with operator (), stateful function).
C++11 also has support, among many enhancements over templates, the rvalue which is specifically created for performance reasons.
The way I see it, C++11 is a god send for gamedevs. They would be idiots not to be using the new features.
- Lambdas
- rvalue parameters
- object constructor initialization
- reusing constructors in other constructors
- typedef'ed templates (new using syntax)
- additional stl classes in case they're already using those
All of these do not add overhead or actually remove existing overhead in the naive old implementation.
I have been playing with irrlicht since its early age (2006 - 1.0) and I found some proof too (lol): http://irrlicht.sourceforge.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=100225&sid=48cf1e218a1388dbd8e1e584908b3415

It is a very nice engine, but being an opensource engine, and even if the dev cost is > 9M it fails when compared to giant engines who create technology instead of following it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MegaTexture as a recent example).

Back to topic:
as I said and I think you are agreeing, some of the features are actually very nice.