Couldnt see a thread on this, sorry if there is one...
Linky
Printable View
Couldnt see a thread on this, sorry if there is one...
Linky
Not reallt too suprising tbh.
Microsoft were always going to try and make people turn to DX9.
How many PC games run in OpenGL now compared to DX9.0C?
Look at the road map for openGL ;) they have included Vista is their 2.0 build at the end of the year :)
Windows include the OpenGL API into a windows where runs Directx, that is (suposse) that the performance of OpenGL can bit down, about 40%.... Windows vista can't not support natively OpenGL, for now....
I think thats supposed to say microsoft have include Opengl in directx but for a performance hit of around 40%, and vista cant do opengl for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by RegMaster
Although why ive got no idea. Might be fun to see what ID have to say about it, cant see them and their licensers being too happy about their stuff suddenly breaking just cos of a new OS (although since it will prob break everything anyway its not too huge a deal)
As far as I know, the performance degradation only occurs for windowed apps but the OpenGL calls will be handled normally for full-screened apps. So apparently you shouldn't notice much in the way of performance drops in most games with OpenGL engines but it is seriously bad news for 3D graphics apps.
Excellent question !Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougal
If you look through a cross-section of printed publications, then you would see test environments with HL2, FarCry, Doom 3 and Riddick
From that, you might assume that up to half the games out there are OpenGL
The reality is that OpenGL is very much the minority - with around 85-90% of the game hitting the market being DirectX
Not mentioning any names, but the second highest circulation IT monthly uses demanding games to test graphic cards - but then 'weighs' the result from each application to match the real world...
This is a cracking way to test, because it means that the benchmark has a greater chance of predicting how future games will play on a specific card...
...and isn't 'honest buying advice' the number 1 reason for benchmarking anything in the first place ?
in terms of sheer volume, yes, more games are made with direct3d
but largely, that's because it's easier for your fresh-out-of-college programmers to work with, when making fifa boxing 2007 dub edition
SERIOUS programmers use opengl, or an abstraction layer which can then do pretty much anything - CryEngine is a direct3d benchmark, sure, but there's an optional opengl renderer in there, allowing for simple porting to $not_microsoft systems like ps2 or mac. unrealengine is abstracted, all id engines are opengl
if you add up all the games made ONLY for direct3d, whose engines are written directly for direct3d, and which aren't crappy sequels only morons buy, you're left with, well, not very much to choose from. one small company with a popular quake1-based teamplay game, which is run by a former team from microsoft, and that's pretty much it
:shocked2:
:crazy:Quote:
Originally Posted by directhex
What can I say... :heckle:Quote:
Originally Posted by directhex
If you take the sentences in the context that they were written, then i agree with Jo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
There are very few games that are made D3D only (from start to finish), a large amount use OpenGL at some point in their development. Im pretty sure HL2 is an example of this - Open GL development, but no official support in the retail product.
What about non-PC games?
The PS3 is based around OpenGl, and iirc, the gamecube is based around it somewhat too.
Most of the graphics work i develop in (3D environments / 3D modelling ect.) is done in programs which use a OpenGL backend for rendering. Most of the workshops ive seen use OpenGL for rendering in their programs. Im not trying to discredit d3d in anyway (its extremely powerful and has many advantages for "the end result"), but OpenGL has a very strong place in the development industry due to its open nature, I don’t really think that can be disputed.
The debate on which is easier to code for comes down to preference I think, but I certainly find OpenGL to read compared to code based on d3d (from the very small amount I know of each language). Having said that, ive always stuck with languages such as PHP/C (a small amount) / ect. and not MS based ones. I can code pages in PHP will relative ease compared to ASP, I just cant get my head around it.
I suppose ATI should be happy about this then... If windows opengl goes compleatly (eventually it will if ms continues) no more linux drivers a large possiblility? Existing ones are/were crap anyway and I doubt ati would code opengl specially for linux.
Apple users still need opengl.. but again, small % of market that I expect is shrinking... more so untill the move from ppc to x86 where it might grow?
Sorry if I was being harsh - but it did make me laugh :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Agent
Apart from the workstation environment, I think that it is true to say that developers are 'following the money' and the vast majority of games in development are DirectX
Even the major games of recent times, like Call of Duty, have moved from OpenGL to DirectX for their next versions
I am not an expert, but I would be surprised if the 'hit' for running OpenGL on top of an additional layer was more than ~10%
(i.e. the 40% hit references that I have seen appear to be total BS/speculation)
Also, I can't see a reason why some games developers could not insist on
running directly with OpenGL (i.e. force the environment)
However, overall, the move toward DirectX seems inevitable - especially with so much development work taking place on the Xbox 360 titles
Our Xenos chip is a complete generation ahead of the graphics that you are likely to find in the PS3 products that arrive in Europe (most likely) around Xmas 2007...
...developers will want a chunk of that '2 year advantage' and - in doing do - will work closer with DirectX
Am I right in thinking that Quake IV will be out on Xbox 360 - first ?
Traditionally, this must have been the strongest bastion of OpenGL-ness...
...or am I wrong ?
But why?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
Go to some development houses, and you’ll see that the majority of development software is using OpenGl for its backend rendering.
If your "vast majority of games in development" means PC games that will ship on a windows platform, then yes, you’re right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
If you *really* mean "vast majority of games in development" being PS2 / Cube / Xbox / PS3 / Xbox360 / PSP / PC / Mac, you couldn’t be further from the truth.
Out of that list of the 8 major formats, only 3 use DirectX as their "main" HAL/HEL. In that figure, ive gave the benefit of the doubt and counted "PC" as being windows based machines running a DirectX game, totally disregarding any other OS and OpenGL use in windows altogether.
By that I assume you mean the upcoming COD2 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
Its being released on PS2 / Cube / PC / Xbox.
So its a safe bet that the Xbox will run it via D3D, that leaves us with 3 other formats. A quick Google doesn’t lead me to any info saying that they are switching to D3D over OpenGL for the PC (although I don’t dispute what you say), but I cant see them totally leaving OpenGL support out.
Then we have the PS2 and Cube. Its a reasonable guess that the PS2 version will sell more than the Xbox version (it has a larger market share for one), based on that alone, do you really think they will develop COD2 for a D3D based rendered from the ground up ?
A few reports around the web say that it’s only for non full window apps, I have no idea how true this is, but if its right, gamers have nothing to worry about anyway. This is disregarding the OpenGL 2 roadmap and how it ties into Vista, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
They can, and do. It depends on the developer really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
The Xbox 360 is one upcoming console. A Microsoft one at that. While Xbox exclusive titles may go down that route, ones that will be multi-format won’t. More to the point, they can’t - if they want to port it to non MS based machines, which undoubtedly they will, they won’t have access to D3D.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
You make it sound like you cant access these features without the use of DirectX?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
DirectX is not needed to access the latest features of a graphics card. While it may be easier to use DirectX to access them, that’s only because graphics cards manufactures such as yourself and NVIDIA work so closely with MS to develop standards for its proprietary D3D based rendering, you have proved that by your last sentence. There is no reason why every feature on your upcoming Xeon chip couldn’t be accessed via OpenGL, other than you not supporting development of it.
If manufactures worked as close with OpenGL as they do with DirectX, then a heck of a lot more games would ship native to it. The problem is, along as manufactures keep disregarding OpenGL as a viable format, it will develop at a much slower rate than of D3D.
If someone wanted to access additional card features via OpenGL, they could either wait for the official ARB approved extension, write their own extension (ala Doom 3), or use vender specific extensions through drivers. All of these take time though, while DirectX (as you pointed out) will, the majority of the time, have native support for it due to you working with Microsoft in its development.
Perhaps, ive no idea if its hitting the PC or Xbox 360 first, but irrelevant of that, its running on a MS based system, of course its more likely (perhaps even has) to use D3D for its rendering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
How much do you want to bet that the PC version will be using OpenGL though? Im also sure the PS3 wont be using D3D to render it, either :)
...but we were talking about OpenGL on Windows - right ?
In that context - software development is moving firmly toward DirectX - no ?
The overhead for OpenGL over Windows should be small enough + cards will be hugely more powerful + developers can always work their way around stuff like that...
Viewed in a wider context, the graphics technology for mobile devices like phones should have a massive impact on global stats for development simply cos they are such numerous little things :)
I saw the mobile phone which looks more like a high end digi cam on ATi's website. Looks like ATi are starting to finally take their arses off their stuff and get it out.
(Thats a hint Andrzej)
True, yes. I was thinking more of the wider picture once the 360 had been mentioned :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrzej
Do you agree on my comments on how OpenGL isn’t as popular as DX now due to lack of manufacture support ?
You said yourself that it if developers want to take full advantage of Xenos that they should use DX, why is this? :)
Do you not see OpenGL as more of an 'open', and viable alternative? (Im not suggesting that you drop DX is any way or form, that would be silly, just provide more support for OpenGL for easier implementation of it)