Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

blog.wolfire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 187 posts

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#51

Post by Jach »

frik wrote: post #16
kayoone wrote: post #10

As a sidenote, Wolfire is currently working on http://www.wolfire.com/overgrowth which is quite impressive in terms of game mechanics. They also post development videos on Youtube regularly which i find highly interesting: http://www.youtube.com/WolfireGames

Yes, but thanks to their HumbleBundle.com success, over the years Overgrowth looks more like a engine tech demo and vaporware.

It's wrong to call it vaporware when after you preorder you can download alpha builds as they come and experience everything shown off in the videos... There's also a small modding community.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#52

Post by hrydgard »

jheriko wrote: post #35
pjmlp wrote: post #8

Again that post. Spreading the lie that all game consoles support OpenGL. Yes, OpenGL is a great API if one cares about portability and FOSS. Reality, the game industry cares about their IP and getting games released no matter what technology stack is used. Many AAA studios don't even develop for all platforms, rather target a main one, leaving the port to subcontractors. Back in the golden days of the arcades, many…

At the time this was accurate, that generation all supported OpenGL in some form...

No, they really didn't.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#54

Post by Narishma »

noselasd wrote: post #41
taspeotis wrote: post #2

API use was shifted in favor of DirectX by Microsoft's two-pronged DirectX campaign around the launch of XBox 360 and Windows Vista, including the spread of FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about the future of OpenGL, and wild exaggeration of the merits of DirectX. I thought it was because that, at the time, the OpenGL API was shit [1]. By the time of OpenGL 2.1, OpenGL was running into a problem. It had a lot of le…

OpenGL was not in any way shit when DirectX started overtaking OpenGL. It became so around the time GPUs started being programmed by shaders - prior to that era OpenGL was quite pleasant compared to DirectX, yet DirectX mostly overtook OpenGL

I'm not sure I agree with your last point. With the exception of Direct3D, pretty much everything from DirectX has been deprecated at one point or another and replaced with external libraries that usually originate from Xbox development.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#55

Post by fulafel »

dualogy wrote: post #33
kayoone wrote: post #12

Isn't this more or less a problem of the past? Today with tools like Unity3d, UDK, CryEngine, Shiva Engine, MonoGame etc, game developers are at a point where they can pretty much stop worrying about the OpenGL/DirectX layer beneath their engines. Those Engines have become so powerful and affordable that it hardly makes any sense to roll your own. In fact, imo you would need a very strong reason to build your own eng…

> Soon all of these will support WebGL/HTML5 as a target and even render most of the (still very basic) WebGL engines obsolete Uh, most of those have their core runtime engine written in C++ and are probably not itching to port their CPU-side code to JavaScript.. Porting to WebGL is only trivial for the GLSL shaders, nothing else. If anything, these companies are waiting and holding out for either PNaCl/ASM.js/Emscri…

It's going to be an interesting race between the Web-native engines and the emulated C++ ones. Some of the WebGL based platforms have come pretty far already, eg. Turbulenz.

The Emscripten based competition only have a few tech demos so far and the possible coming of PNaCl outside Chrome doesn't look that probable at this point.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#56

Post by Narishma »

girvo wrote: post #47

I'm amazed at the comments here on this thread... Personally OpenGL is strictly superior to DirectX, solely due to being cross platform. With the release of the Steam Box and a push from Valve to look at Linux as a first class target for games, hopefully we'll see development proceed to create better tooling to rival that and exceed DX. This is good for all of us consumers, as the lock in inherent to the technology c…

I don't know of anyone who does game logic in OpenGL.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#57

Post by Erwin »

frik wrote: post #16
kayoone wrote: post #10

As a sidenote, Wolfire is currently working on http://www.wolfire.com/overgrowth which is quite impressive in terms of game mechanics. They also post development videos on Youtube regularly which i find highly interesting: http://www.youtube.com/WolfireGames

Yes, but thanks to their HumbleBundle.com success, over the years Overgrowth looks more like a engine tech demo and vaporware.

They seem to be happy to let you pay $30 for the Alpha version though, despite it being in Alpha since at least 2009 (based on the date on the FAQ). I'm surprised PayPal will let you pre-order something that has been more than 4 years in development and has no release date.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#58

Post by girvo »

Narishma wrote: post #56
girvo wrote: post #47

I'm amazed at the comments here on this thread... Personally OpenGL is strictly superior to DirectX, solely due to being cross platform. With the release of the Steam Box and a push from Valve to look at Linux as a first class target for games, hopefully we'll see development proceed to create better tooling to rival that and exceed DX. This is good for all of us consumers, as the lock in inherent to the technology c…

I don't know of anyone who does game logic in OpenGL.

That was my point, I was being snarky. Man, text totally is the worst for that sort of thing...

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#59

Post by marvin »

axefrog wrote: post #49
marvin wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit off topic - Do you know a good source (preferably in book form) on development with Direct3D and HLSL? I have been looking, and I'm not really sure where to start. The focus is on low-level shader programming, not drawing 3D models but manipulating 3D primitives. Preferably if it is possible to do using some C# wrapper.

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-3D-Game-Programming-Direc... Fantastic book. C++ but you can use SharpDX for your C# development, which complies reasonably closely with the standard DirectX APIs. There are numerous websites/articles only a Google search away to fill in any gaps if/when you get stuck. This is the approach I've been taking. http://nathanridley.com if you're interested.

Thanks :)

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#60

Post by shiven »

MaulingMonkey wrote: post #14
ekianjo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a legacy issue: once developers start using DirectX, it's harder for them to go back, and traditionally PC development has been Windows-only (more or less) for many years. Now that the market is becoming fragmented again between different platforms, there is more incentive to go for a cross-platform API than before - and that's where standards matter.

Not really 'legacy' per se either... good luck running OpenGL on Microsoft's consoles or as a ModernUI application! DirectX being a broader and, in my opinion, better designed API certainly doesn't hurt it's adoption either.

What about OSX? Does DirectX work (at all/well) on it? Linux? How feasible is it to program with DirectX on any non-MS platform?

Edit: I guess the point I'm making is, OpenGL runs on non-MS as well as MS platforms (perfectly/badly is another question), but DirectX is locked to Microsoft only. That is what makes it of little to no value for people like me who need to care about cross-platform products and support.

Post reply on HN