These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Replace DirectX with OpenGL

Author
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
#21 - 2014-02-06 03:45:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Bjor Talvanen wrote:
OpenGL right now can do more than DirectX, with similar or better performance, and runs on more platforms. So unless Microsoft is going to 'sponsor' you, why even bother developing your game in DirectX?



Its a guaranteed market.

Mac gaming is iffy. Only transplants like me do it really. And to be honest I do it either bootcamp or parallels. edit: Some steam games however are very decent wrapped ports, I like them at any rate.

I used to make fun of mac idiots....oops...fanatics but of late I am picking up one of their oddities myself. Something open gl won't solve. That being while graphically compatible it would barring massive rewrite still be a windows app ported over to mac. Put another way...it still be as crappy as having eve in a wrapper like we do now for mac.

The oddity I am picking up is if I see 2 apps that do the same thing but one bothered to be built 100% for mac os (i.e. cocoa development) I will buy that one. Barring it being a lackluster pos anyway. I will and have paid more for this in fact. So a game dev knows with some mac users its not jsut the graphics...its the whole damn package,

Gonna give us a mac app...well then cocoa that pig. The more reasonable side to me understands this is not practical however. Why I don't mind the DX. Wrapper suits me fine as I know I have a snow balls chance in hell of ccp flooding the cubicles with pure mac os programmers.


Linux brings in lack of standardization. Put me in a corner for it and I would cut off some peeps if a game dev. I'd either focus in redhat/centos or I might go ubuntu/debian. Or I'd do both but not devote time/money getting optimal product out to the other flavors.
Loki Angrboda
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2014-02-06 10:12:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Loki Angrboda
Zan Shiro wrote:
Bjor Talvanen wrote:
OpenGL right now can do more than DirectX, with similar or better performance, and runs on more platforms. So unless Microsoft is going to 'sponsor' you, why even bother developing your game in DirectX?



Its a guaranteed market.



OpenGL is running on Windows and other Plattforms. This thread is not about porting to linux. It is about porting to OpenGL based Frameworks like SDL and Qt!

Zan Shiro wrote:

Linux brings in lack of standardization. Put me in a corner for it and I would cut off some peeps if a game dev. I'd either focus in redhat/centos or I might go ubuntu/debian. Or I'd do both but not devote time/money getting optimal product out to the other flavors.


That is not a problem at all. Valve and Gordon proved that. The current Steam Client runs on every single distribution i have tested. Why? Because they bundle all dependencies they need, and that is not so much.
Greg Arosa
Sebiestor Tribe
#23 - 2014-02-06 21:14:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Greg Arosa
Loki Angrboda wrote:

Dav Varan wrote:

I think DX is the reliable future bet being backed by a very well resourced multinational with a substantial investment in the Tech.


Did you ever learned something about the Windows driver ecosystem? Modeswitching and the bad implenetation of DirectX?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenGL_and_Direct3D#Mode_switching_.28on_Microsoft_Windows.29


While I could agree that switching to OpenGL itself is a good thing, I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind.

UPD: btw, the link you gave is irrelevant since vista was released. Read carefully what you link next time.
Loki Angrboda
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-02-06 21:16:06 UTC
Greg Arosa wrote:
I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind.


Could you explain what you mean? X.org Server? Yeah, it's not the best. But there are new alterantives coming. The kernel and graphics are well designed and functional.
Greg Arosa
Sebiestor Tribe
#25 - 2014-02-06 21:48:55 UTC
Loki Angrboda wrote:
Greg Arosa wrote:
I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind.


Could you explain what you mean? X.org Server? Yeah, it's not the best. But there are new alterantives coming. The kernel and graphics are well designed and functional.


X.org is crap now, but the original design wasn't that bad. Its a shame that it evolved into what it is now. Wayland, as an alternative, might be better, I haven't seen it in action and haven't looked at its source code, so I can't really tell.

The kernel on the other hand is quite a mess. Open source video drivers do not support all the features hardware provides, while the proprietary ones get broken now and then by the kernel devs changing api.

TL;DR linux stack is a different kind of mess with nobody to carry the responsibility for it.
Loki Angrboda
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2014-02-06 22:26:05 UTC
Greg Arosa wrote:


The kernel on the other hand is quite a mess. Open source video drivers do not support all the features hardware provides, while the proprietary ones get broken now and then by the kernel devs changing api.


Ah, ok. The main issue is, that the opensource drivers are build without any spec by hand. Just by reversing the properitary drivers in most cases. I hope AMD and nvidia will release open source drivers for the kernel, as intel did.

The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast.

But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;)
Greg Arosa
Sebiestor Tribe
#27 - 2014-02-06 22:45:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Greg Arosa
Loki Angrboda wrote:

Ah, ok. The main issue is, that the opensource drivers are build without any spec by hand. Just by reversing the properitary drivers in most cases. I hope AMD and nvidia will release open source drivers for the kernel, as intel did.


Not true, actually. Intel and AMD publish specs for all the chips they release. A huge part of opensource drivers is written by intel/amd employees.

Loki Angrboda wrote:

The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast.

But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;)


API, not ABI. But this is not the point, I agree. OpenGL port will mostly benefit linux folks, so linux port is somewhat implied here.
Loki Angrboda
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2014-02-07 00:23:42 UTC
Greg Arosa wrote:

Not true, actually. Intel and AMD publish specs for all the chips they release.

Oh, i missed that one ... the last time i was looking for it, there was only the old cards availible. But after a quick search if have found that they released all missing docs at once in october last year.

Greg Arosa wrote:

A huge part of opensource drivers is written by intel/amd employees.

Right, told so.

Greg Arosa wrote:

Loki Angrboda wrote:

The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast.

But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;)


API, not ABI. But this is not the point, I agree. OpenGL port will mostly benefit linux folks, so linux port is somewhat implied here.


thx, too tired ... just thought about the binary blobs of nvidia, and writing about ABI ... omg ...

Yeah, linux folks would benefit from it. It would improve the performance with wine even more. But also all windows and OSX users. they could unleach the full power of there expensive GFX cards. Use all the shiny features, released in the time since the last dx update.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#29 - 2014-02-09 09:44:29 UTC
I think a day will come when the Eve client will be based in a Virtual Machine. Then it won't matter.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#30 - 2014-02-09 11:02:55 UTC
I am mac User myself and i dont care if they support OSX or Linux, i simply Support OpenGL because its the better Engine (sure it DOES have some serious flaws) but Overall its much better then DX is.

And its the Future hands down.
Pew Terror
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-02-09 20:54:15 UTC
Posting in an "I can use youtube therefore i must be the god of software architecture" tread.
Previous page12