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

161–170 of 187 posts

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#161

Post by benzor »

kevingadd wrote: post #68
exDM69 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many AAA studios don't even develop for all platforms, rather target a main one, leaving the port to subcontractors. AAAs are one thing and are mostly based on engine technology that has been in development for years. For them D3D vs. OpenGL is a non-issue that was solved a decade ago. Or they stick to being Windows only. And they have the budget to port (or hire a subcontractor to port) one way or another. For ind…

Your statement that the most money comes from Android and iOS is not really supported by the facts for a typical indie. F2P requires a lot of investment/luck and non-F2P on mobile is a steadily shrinking market. Many of the big indie successes are PC titles sold on Steam or console titles. I'm sure you can find some examples of mobile successes that brought in big money for a small indie studio, but I'd be shocked if…

> F2P requires a lot of investment/luck and non-F2P on mobile is a steadily shrinking market.

I've been an independent developer for a year now, and having just launched our first game I can really echo that this is how we feel about the App Store too. You can rank in the "top 100 highest grossing games" for a multitude of countries and still make absolutely no money on a F2P game... we've been there. And various articles back up this "winner takes all" vibe [1].

[1] http://www.whiteboardmag.com/the-one-percent-winner-take-all...

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#162

Post by [deleted] »

kbenson wrote: post #11
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…

That stackexchange post is very, very good. Points just for bring that out.

[deleted]

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#163

Post by yuhong »

ekianjo wrote: post #6
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…

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.

And to continue the story started from the stackexchange post, again the depreciation turned out to be a good decision. Guess what OpenGL ES that is used today on mobile devices and WebGL in browsers basically is?

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#164

Post by nl »

EpicEng wrote: post #134
AshleysBrain wrote: post #63

Isn't mobile and the web the decider these days? Article is from 2010, but consider if you want to develop 3D on any of these platforms: iOS - OpenGL ES Android - OpenGL ES Mac - OpenGL Linux - OpenGL HTML5 - WebGL (based on OpenGL ES) - even in IE! Emerging platforms like Tizen, Firefox OS - OpenGL ES/WebGL DirectX is just for Windows and Windows Phone. Isn't it getting to the point where the bother of having to wri…

Yeah, if all you care about is candy crush and the random pay to win adventure game. No one is playing "real" games on tablets or phones, nor will they be anytime in the foreseeable future.

Like to put some money on that?

I'd bet money that in two years time 2 out of the top 5 "real" games will be available on iOS and/or Android. (Not entirely sure how we are defining "real" games, though).

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#165

Post by EpicEng »

nl wrote: post #164
EpicEng wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if all you care about is candy crush and the random pay to win adventure game. No one is playing "real" games on tablets or phones, nor will they be anytime in the foreseeable future.

Like to put some money on that? I'd bet money that in two years time 2 out of the top 5 "real" games will be available on iOS and/or Android. (Not entirely sure how we are defining "real" games, though).

I would. It's simply not practical to play games on mobile devices that require more complex input devices which allow for many discrete inputs and more precise control. I don't know, perhaps someone much smarter than I will figure something amazing out, but I doubt it.

And I shouldn't have used the term "real". I'm talking about games like WoW. Many (many) buttons that need to be pressed quickly in response to your opponent (not talking about LFR obviously...).

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#166

Post by EpicEng »

bcoates wrote: post #155
EpicEng wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if all you care about is candy crush and the random pay to win adventure game. No one is playing "real" games on tablets or phones, nor will they be anytime in the foreseeable future.

I installed TF2 on my work tablet yesterday, it worked just fine. Civ 5 and X-Com are great on it. Is that "real" enough?

No. Like I have said more than once now, I'm talking about games with complex control schemes that require quick reactions.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#167

Post by EpicEng »

tripplethrendo wrote: post #151
EpicEng wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of your examples are casual games. WoW, Rift, Guild Wars, SC, competitive FPS's, Witcher style RPG's, Elder Scrolls, etc. these are not games you will be playing on a tablet. There exists a clear divide between casual and serious gamers. I don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong or inherently inferior about the more casual side of things, just that they really are two very different markets.

You can play WoW and Guild Wars 2 on a Mac. Doesn't that mean they are OpenGL?

WoW uses OpenGL and it runs like crap on a mac.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#168

Post by EpicEng »

MBCook wrote: post #152
sliverstorm wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately there's no good word for the market your parent is talking about. "real" games, "hardcore" games, all have negative connotations, but your parent is contrasting lightweight games to heavyweight games. Angry Birds to Bioshock.

I think that's the issue here too. I would divide things in three. Casual games are often quick or pick-up-and-play. Angry birds, Bejeweled, even things like Peggle or Plants vs Zombies. Most flash/FaceBook games fit in here. Then there are the hardcore games. Eve Online, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Street Fighter 4, etc. These games often require lots of skill or dedication, and are often big…

Sure, there is a lot of overlap too. It's just that one extreme that I don't see being satisfied by mobile devices any time soon (if ever).

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#169

Post by pjmlp »

jheriko wrote: post #113
pjmlp wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it wasn't. Only someone without console development experience can issue such a statement.

right... so PSGL wasn't a thing? I never saw the OpenGL for 360 or touched it, but I was told I was mistaken by a few guys when I mentioned that it didn't exist - it wasn't there at launch but MS added it later (third hand quote)... ps. google me, i have considerable experience. that doesn't stop me from being wrong or making a mistake, but don't make such brash assumptions.

Sorry for jumping to conclusions, but as you can see from these threads many around here tend not to be aware how the industry works.

Myself, I don't have explicit game industry experience, but I do follow it since the mid-90's, having been a IGDA member, GDC Mag subscriber, paid my attendance to GDCE a few times and do know a few people in German studios.

If I work for the boring IT industry it is mainly for not wanting to deal with crunch time and rather enjoy enterprise benefits.

PSGL is a thing and is multiple times reference in a few Sony papers, but it a mix of OpenGL ES 1.0 with Cg and lacks the performance LibGCM offers.

Furthermore, when Sony asked if anyone cared about OpenGL ES 2.0, no seemed to care that much.

As far as I know the XBox PSGL was more of a proof of concept thingy than a proper API. Also a third hand quote.

The thing is that all those APIs follow an OpenGL like way of doing 3D graphics, but they are all different enough that you end up with multiple code paths.

Re: Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX

#170

Post by kazagistar »

EpicEng wrote: post #165
nl wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like to put some money on that? I'd bet money that in two years time 2 out of the top 5 "real" games will be available on iOS and/or Android. (Not entirely sure how we are defining "real" games, though).

I would. It's simply not practical to play games on mobile devices that require more complex input devices which allow for many discrete inputs and more precise control. I don't know, perhaps someone much smarter than I will figure something amazing out, but I doubt it. And I shouldn't have used the term "real". I'm talking about games like WoW. Many (many) buttons that need to be pressed quickly in response to your…

WoW is a terrible example due to the latency mitigation factors built into the game: you can only cast spells every so often, and then you have a global cool down between spells. You could totally do it on an ipad or some such if the control scheme was a bit better optimized for it.
Post reply on HN