 |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
 previous story
next story  |
|
"John Carmack: "Rage is not going to use DirectX 10"" Discussion Page: 1 2 »» |
|
 |   darrenc182
Member since: 9/27/2002 From: Canada | |||
Posted - 8/9/2007 7:35:24 PM | ||||
| Is Tech5 using OpenGL or has Carmack finally moved over to directx since he's coding the engine to be compatible with XBox 360? | ||||
| ||||
| CaesarsGhost
Member since: 4/24/2007 From: Clearwater, FL | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 7:37:40 PM | ||||
| GO CARMACK!!! All Carmack's engines use OpenGL. Go download Quake3's engine's source for free, you'll see for yourself. | ||||
| ||||
| V-man
Member since: 3/2/2002 From: Montreal, Quebec | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 7:45:59 PM | ||||
| We know that Doom 3 and games based on the engine use OpenGL but the article doesn't say what API ID tech 5 is going to use. | ||||
| ||||
| darrenc182
Member since: 9/27/2002 From: Canada | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 8:12:13 PM | ||||
| I know all of the previous id game engines use opengl, but john carmack said he might change to use DirectX because he was dissatisfied with some of OpenGL's interfaces, namely pbuffers. I thought that maybe he would start using DirectX because of his distaste for the OpenGL interfaces and because id is developing technology for XBox as well. Now I just remembered that it has to be running on OpenGL because it was running on a Mac with Mac OS X 10.5 | ||||
| ||||
| janta
Member since: 2/7/2006 | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 8:15:41 PM | ||||
| john ca-m-a-r-ck != john ca-r-m-a-ck | ||||
| ||||
| Ravyne
Member since: 2/26/2007 From: Kirkland, WA | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 9:42:55 PM | ||||
| On the PC/MAC/*nix its running OpenGL. On the PS3 its running a combination of Sony's OpenGL|ES implementation in combination with direct command-buffer writes through Sony's CTM library. On XBox 360 its running on the 360's Direct3D API, which is similar to Direct3D 9. I imagine its possible that the Windows version will support a Direct3D9 code-path, since its similar to the 360, but its also different in many ways. Carmack actually likes Direct3D9, so its not beyond the realm of possibility, but I haven't heard one way or the other. | ||||
| ||||
| nts
Member since: 4/20/2004 | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 9:43:42 PM | ||||
| It is using DirectX on the Xbox360 which was initially the lead platform for Tech5 IIRC. OpenGL for PC, MAC and PS3. Check out his Tech5 walkthrough's... Part 1 Part 2 Tools His impressions about the xbox360 and the PS3 are here. | ||||
| ||||
| skoobydoo1134
Member since: 5/23/2007 | |||
|
Posted - 8/9/2007 11:39:15 PM | ||||
| Carmack is the only person that probably listens to himself on a recording and thinks to himself... Man I sound better than I thought :) That aside the technology looks pretty good. I imagine they have built the thing IDT5 to use DX9/10... But since the install base for DX10 cards is slim they don't want to limit the market. I imagine the same would be said about Enemy Territories... Which is true since Carmack already said it in his presentation. | ||||
| ||||
| vinculum
Member since: 9/21/2005 From: Jyvaskyla, Western Finland | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 3:53:57 AM | ||||
| I have always wondered why some companies build their engines for only a single API, then they face the horrible job of porting. Id (the new Id) and Epic are a good example of things done right. You shouldn't be able to tell a global API choise by platform. | ||||
| ||||
| Daaark
Member since: 8/1/2001 From: Ottawa, On, Canada | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 4:16:35 AM | ||||
| Why do people care so much what API Carmack's engine uses? There's no race or war going on between them, and you don't need to know that Carmack still uses OpenGL to tell you it's okay to keep using it yourself. Both APIs achieve the exact same thing, so comparing them anymore is beyond pointless. Carmack always releases products that can run on at least the last two generations of hardware, and it's not yet possible with DX10, so it's an easy decision to make, especially if all the functionality that is needed exists under D3D9 or D3D9ex. Only a few of Carmack's engines were OpenGL, not all. Wolfenstein, Doom, Doom 2, and Quake were not. Quake later got an OpenGL port. Quake 2 was multi-api. It had software, glide, and gl. Only Quake 3 and Doom 3 engines were full-on OpenGL. | ||||
| ||||
| V-man
Member since: 3/2/2002 From: Montreal, Quebec | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 4:27:16 AM | ||||
Quote: Just curiosity. There aren't many games based on GL compared to D3D so it's good that ID games stays with it. There is a significant diff between the 2 API : D3D is Windows only. It's nice of Carmack to release Linux and Mac binaries. | ||||
| ||||
| trexmaster78
Member since: 7/18/2007 From: Paris, Ile-de-France | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 4:27:59 AM | ||||
Quote: I'm pretty sure it's because there wasn't any OGL implementation available for PCs running DOS/Windows. Quote: That must be because, at the time, 3DFX was the main 3D accelerator provider, and their API was Glide. | ||||
| ||||
| wolf XNA/DirectX MVP
Member since: 1/8/2000 From: Carlsbad, CA | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 4:37:18 AM | ||||
Quote:there is no OpenGL ES implementation on the PS3 ... the library everyone is using is called libgcm. It is like OpenGL and Direct3D another software interface to the hardware. Quote:what is so horrible about it? it is just the same hardware with a different software interface. You write a thin abstraction layer once and then it is done. All the challenges you will bump into are differences in hardware not software. There are no AAA OpenGL games anymore because the main reason to use OpenGL would be to target the Linux and Mac users ... the Linux users in general are not buying that much software, so it does not make sense to offer a dedicated port for them and the Mac users are still not that much :-) So what Carmack is doing here is giving out freebie's which is nice of him. | ||||
| ||||
| Hyper_Eye
Member since: 8/10/2007 From: Huntsville, AL | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 1:51:10 PM | ||||
Quote: As someone who has strictly used Linux and OS X for about 7 years I always appreciate games being released for these platforms. For Linux in particular, I purchase every ID title that is released. While the sales may not be huge, I am certain that they more then cover the cost of porting them to these platforms. I know many Linux users who purchase ID games just as I do. All software I develop is developed on Linux and ported to Windows later. As I begin getting heavier into game development this method of development will not change for me. I find it unfortunate that DirectX is being used in such a large percentage of games as MS will never make it available to OS X and other *nix systems even though it would completely benefit users and developers. It's all about the monopoly. If more games were multi-platform more people would switch. | ||||
| ||||
| Ravyne
Member since: 2/26/2007 From: Kirkland, WA | |||
|
Posted - 8/10/2007 2:01:26 PM | ||||
Quote: There most certainly is, and its called PSGL. Its Sony's proprietary OpenGL|ES implementation, based on OpenGL|ES 1.1 with custom extensions and shader support through nVidia's CG because ES 2.0 wasn't finalized at the time. I've heard the other lib referred to as CTM, but I suspect that libGCM is the same thing, or perhaps CTM encompasses several things, including libGCM (or possibly vice versa). From everything I've heard, CTM/libGCM is far more low-level than either OpenGL or Direct3D, being only a very thin layer over the hardware interface. But unless Carmack, hundreds of Sony Developers and Sony themselves are hallucinating, there certainly is OpenGL|ES for the PS3. | ||||
| ||||
| Mr_Jones
Member since: 8/11/2007 From: Lisboa, Lisboa | |||
|
Posted - 8/11/2007 7:16:13 AM | ||||
Quote: People would do better if they search before saying things like that. For more information on PSGL see http://www.research.scea.com/gdc2006/GLESTutorial07_Arnaud_Remi_PSGL.pdf http://www.research.scea.com/gdc2006/gdc06-for-khronos.pdf | ||||
| ||||
| Daaark
Member since: 8/1/2001 From: Ottawa, On, Canada | |||
|
Posted - 8/11/2007 10:09:40 PM | ||||
Quote:I find it unfortunate that people always choose to blame Microsoft for their own favorite platform's inability to perform. Is it impossible for Apple to write a 'DirectMAC' type api for game developers? It's not microsoft's responsibility to spoonfeed the other OSes. | ||||
| ||||
| shurcool
Member since: 5/6/2001 From: Toronto, Ontario | |||
|
Posted - 8/11/2007 10:40:14 PM | ||||
Quote: No one wants to have to deal with even more graphics APIs, especially if it's one per platform. They all do the same things, so why is it a good idea to have to learn/use 3 different ones to make your game run on 3 different platforms, as opposed to all 3 platforms supporting a common API. | ||||
| ||||
| Ravyne
Member since: 2/26/2007 From: Kirkland, WA | |||
|
Posted - 8/11/2007 11:51:21 PM | ||||
| The fact is, we need more than one graphics API in order to spur innovation -- lets face it, everyone and everything gets lazy without competition. Neither Direct3D nor OpenGL would be this far along without being driven forward in a constant effort to one-up one another. In fact, the two really do feed off of each other. The OpenGL extensions mechanism provides graphics hardware vendors with an easy way to try out their own proprietary features and extensions -- at the same time, the OpenGL ARB has been notoriously slow in adopting these extensions, even well after they have become supported across many vendors. Microsoft, on the other hand, offers no extensions mechanism, but has traditionally been faster to adopt new features into mainline Direct3D. In essence, OpenGL is often the birthplace of new innovations -- via extensions -- while Direct3D is where it is first sustained. As long as we have one or more well-supported, cross-platform API, and one or more fast-moving proprietary API I think we're pretty well off. I'd actually go as far as saying that its possible that having exactly one of each (open and proprietary) is the optimal situation for the graphics and computer industry as they are now. | ||||
| ||||
| moosedude
Member since: 6/22/2006 From: Hatfield, Hertfordshire | |||
|
Posted - 8/13/2007 5:17:22 AM | ||||
| I was dead disappointed with the graphics/gameplay from doom 3, it blatantly ignored everything else going on in the fps world around it which I think generally is ID software's strategy, trying to sit outside the box. It was essentially the same tight narrow corridors which the same bland grey textures, I lost confidence in their abilities as innovators and market leaders. My point with this is I think ID software have become a little too detached from the rest of the industry, and stating that DX10 will not be used is fairly short sighted; not even to state that it *may* support DX10 in the near future, to leave the door open. With a tech. such as a 3D engine, which will be sold to others; its important to have lots of options open to other developers, they are probably going to be using this thing for years after its initial release, by then DX10 & vista could be widely adopted. It is a silly turn of events. of course somebody doesn't have to use directx, you have opengl, with the version 3.0 standard coming but my reckoning is other companies will have something amazing on the horizon that will adopt these new api technologies, if I had the choice between a directx9 and directx10 engine to buy, I'd would choose the dx10 engine to ensure a bit more distance for my bucks. | ||||
| ||||
| AgentX
Member since: 6/17/2007 From: Colorado Springs, CO | |||
Posted - 8/13/2007 2:26:14 PM | ||||
| What I find interesting is that www.glsetup.com used to take you to a site for downloading the newest opengl drivers (aka "glsetup.exe"). But now it is a mirror of the id software site... | ||||
| ||||
| V-man
Member since: 3/2/2002 From: Montreal, Quebec | |||
|
Posted - 8/16/2007 5:43:11 AM | ||||
Quote: DirectMac did exist. It was called QuickDraw3D. It is abandoned in favor of OpenGL. Apple took that decision because QuickDraw3D was unpopular and OpenGL was already an advanced API and there are plenty of people who have learned it. And so, now there is long list of games using GL and compiled for the Mac OSX. | ||||
| ||||
| swax111
Member since: 8/29/2007 | |||
Posted - 8/29/2007 7:07:09 PM | ||||
| I think you folks are sort of missing the point... The API really is important. But not from a development standpoint - sure any good engine is going to abstract that from you, and you as a game developer will not worry about it. But what Carmack is trying to do, and what is smart for him to do, is not tie himself to the success of any one platform. OpenGL is the way to do this... But most big game companies arent concerned about that - they just want their stock to be high the next quarter, and so they worry about the next hit release not their engine's ability to last technically as the industry changes. Microsoft is at is seeing the dusk of their great years. If you dont believe this, take some time to look at the major trends over the last few years. Look beyond just gaming... They have lost touch with what customers want. XBox will probably not be the leading platform going into the future. Its a loss leader for Microsoft, and they have failed to leverage it while Apple has essentially become the defacto leader in the converged media market. Game consoles are fads - its whatever is the coolest out there. Their API is besides the point. Carmack sees this. This is why he sticks with OpenGL or some combination of it and other stuff. He may use other APIs depending on the platform, but he lets OpenGL be his measuring stick for what he will depend on. He's also an OSS fan, so that leads him there. They demo on Mac to show its cross platform - also, they probably see Mac gaining about another 2-5% of PC sales, which they will do in the next two years. NO ONE is gaining that kind of ground but Apple. The next killer platform will probably be one that is not yet invented - but the only way it will be DirectX based is if Microsoft makes it. And I think we all know that wont happen... Basing around OpenGL is just logical. | ||||
| ||||
| swax111
Member since: 8/29/2007 | |||
|
Posted - 8/29/2007 7:07:36 PM | ||||
| I think you folks are sort of missing the point... The API really is important. But not from a development standpoint - sure any good engine is going to abstract that from you, and you as a game developer will not worry about it. But what Carmack is trying to do, and what is smart for him to do, is not tie himself to the success of any one platform. OpenGL is the way to do this... But most big game companies arent concerned about that - they just want their stock to be high the next quarter, and so they worry about the next hit release not their engine's ability to last technically as the industry changes. Microsoft is at is seeing the dusk of their great years. If you dont believe this, take some time to look at the major trends over the last few years. Look beyond just gaming... They have lost touch with what customers want. XBox will probably not be the leading platform going into the future. Its a loss leader for Microsoft, and they have failed to leverage it while Apple has essentially become the defacto leader in the converged media market. Game consoles are fads - its whatever is the coolest out there. Their API is besides the point. Carmack sees this. This is why he sticks with OpenGL or some combination of it and other stuff. He may use other APIs depending on the platform, but he lets OpenGL be his measuring stick for what he will depend on. He's also an OSS fan, so that leads him there. They demo on Mac to show its cross platform - also, they probably see Mac gaining about another 2-5% of PC sales, which they will do in the next two years. NO ONE is gaining that kind of ground but Apple. The next killer platform will probably be one that is not yet invented - but the only way it will be DirectX based is if Microsoft makes it. And I think we all know that wont happen... Basing around OpenGL is just logical. | ||||
| ||||
|
Page: 1 2 »» All times are ET (US)  | previous story
next story |
|
