Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Is OpenGL good for games?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
28 replies to this topic

#1 Taboo Builder   Members   -  Reputation: 1026

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 07:48 PM

The thing is, I''m starting to make a 3D-engine, butt, I''m not sure witch is better OpenGl or Direct3D? Please reply!

Sponsor:

#2 Midnight Coder   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 07:55 PM

Really, it is completely a matter of preference. What is right for some, may not be right for you. OpenGL isn't better than Direct3D, and Direct3D isn't better than OpenGL. Both have advantages/disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses. Both would be equally good for a 3D game engine. You should find out some information on both, and decide for yourself which is better.

Edited by - Midnight Coder on August 21, 2001 2:56:38 AM

#3 Taboo Builder   Members   -  Reputation: 1026

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 08:01 PM

Well witch is faster?
OpenGl or Direct3D?

#4 Wavewash   Members   -  Reputation: 202

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 08:22 PM

Dude! they are totally equall now. With DX8. OpenGl and directx are totally equall APIs it''s just a preference of the programmer now.
~Wave

#5 bobatefrei   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 08:52 PM

"Well witch is faster?"
- This is totaly driver dependant. My TNT 1 is a bit faster with OpenGL especially in windowed mode... What about the other cards?

"OpenGl and directx are totally equall APIs it''s just a preference of the programmer now."

-Under Windows, it is now true. But for other OS, you don''t have choice: there is only OpenGL.




#6 grady   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 20 August 2001 - 11:08 PM

Its a matter of preferences as to which is better but whether or not to marry a 600 pound woman is a matter of preference too, so that doesn't mean preferring direct3D can't be considered insane by the rest of us.

So its a matter of preference, but whatever you decide never be seduced away from OpenGL by the shit storm of bad publicity surrounding OGL extensions. Nvidia claims that there texture shader extension for OpenGL is "a bit more powerful" than Direct3D's pixel shaders. why is this? I guess its because Nvidia can write there own standards for their own hardware with OpenGL. Of course when ATI comes out with some hardware that can do texture shading, then OpenGLer's will have to deal with 2 extensions until texture shaders get unified into an EXT or ARB class extension. But OpenGLer's will be able to expose the nuances of both the ATI and NVIDIA texture shaders where as the Direct3Der's are stuck with whatever the 3D graphics geniuses at Microsoft think should be standard. BTW texture shaders are easy to use in OpenGL*. so dealing with the extension, and God forbid 2 extensions for the same thing, is no big deal; getting the most out of the hardware is a good thing and the extension scheme lets you do that . That's just texture shaders though; I guess you should find out as much as possible about both API's. Here's a good site for OGL: www.opengl.org. I'm sure you've seen the DirectX msdn site www.msdn.microsoft.com/directx; if not you can download the documentation and see what that's all about.

* there aren't any new functions, just several new constants that you pass as parameters to some already existing functions so putting together a texture shader is fairly easy you could probably get something going from scrath in one afternoon on your first try. Coming up with something that looks good might be difficult but thats a matter of art not API.

Edited by - grady on August 21, 2001 6:17:52 AM

#7 mittens   Moderators   -  Reputation: 1315

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 August 2001 - 02:37 AM

This sounds like a smooth way to start a Direct3D vs. OpenGL war. For all the previous ones, do a search of "Direct3D or OpenGL" threads.... You''ll find a very good amount of them.

------------------------------
Trent (ShiningKnight)
E-mail me
Shining Darkness- A division of Chromesphere Studios

#8 Drizzt DoUrden   Members   -  Reputation: 100

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 21 August 2001 - 01:38 PM

Allright, this is the fourth time i answered this SAME EXACT question in the last 24 hours. Direct X is better if you are trying to make 2D games because 1)there are barely any tutorials on making 2D games in opengl 2) there no books on making 2D games in openGl. OpenGL is goood because it is multiplatformed. If you want to learn opengl, then read kevi and Daves(members of the GDNet staff) book called OpenGL Game Programming. For direct X, andre lamothes Tpis and Tricks of the Gurus or something like that, so i am told. 2D games can be made with OpenGL, but good luck finding out how, I have been trying for almost 20 days, searching al over the net, but all I can find is NeHe''s 21st tutorial. And yes, direct x does make 3d games, they can do everything the same way, just 2D with openGL is harder to find out how to do, and to do in general. If you are looking to get into the Game Development bussiness, I would suggest learning Direct X first, then OpenGL, knowing both would reallly help.
Good Luck.

"I''''ve sparred with creatures from the nine hells themselves... I barely plan on breaking a sweat here, today."~Drizzt Do''''Urden

#9 sjobergh   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 22 August 2001 - 08:31 PM

Hmm, If I was you (which I''m not), I would go for OpenGL.
It''s way easier to use (and faster than D3D on some graphic-cards

But, I would still use some DX components like DInput and DSound.

And the thing that OpenGL can be ported to Linux and Mac is great for a bigger group of users (when you finally release a game).

Good Luck!

#10 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 23 August 2001 - 02:47 AM

Drizzt DoUrden:

Actually DirectGraphics is in the same state of capabillities with OpenGL now, 2D graphics is achieved by simply texturing a quad (essentially billboarding) and holding your camera to a fixed position. And then you use methods like Alpha Blending etc... to achieve your required affect. You move your "sprite" around the world by using the same 3D transformation techniques such as translations and rotations. Why not just use DX7 and use DirectDraw? Well firstly your 2D game now is accelerated meaning you can get away with alot more. Secondly you can still make use of the 3D features and create some nice effects which were hard to do or impossible using just bitmaps. And I wouldn''t say that "OpenGl in 2D is hard to do", it doesn''t take an einstein to work out how you can trick the user into thinking it''s 2D and that''s what it is all about .

#11 Bully   Members   -  Reputation: 144

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 02:47 AM

Drizzt DoUrden:

Actually DirectGraphics is in the same state of capabillities with OpenGL now, 2D graphics is achieved by simply texturing a quad (essentially billboarding) and holding your camera to a fixed position. And then you use methods like Alpha Blending etc... to achieve your required affect. You move your "sprite" around the world by using the same 3D transformation techniques such as translations and rotations. Why not just use DX7 and use DirectDraw? Well firstly your 2D game now is accelerated meaning you can get away with alot more. Secondly you can still make use of the 3D features and create some nice effects which were hard to do or impossible using just bitmaps. And I wouldn''t say that "OpenGl in 2D is hard to do", it doesn''t take an einstein to work out how you can trick the user into thinking it''s 2D and that''s what it is all about .

#12 TheRealMAN11   Members   -  Reputation: 142

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:18 AM

Ok I asked this same question a few months back. Some might remember. Since then I have used both OGL, D2D (in dx7), and D3D. I would have to sum it up like this (just like every one else did).

They have the same power and prettymuch the same ease of use. The differences are OpenGL is supported on nearly all operating systems where as DirectX is stuck on windows.

Now let it be clear that DirectX includes input, sound, networking, and graphics where as OpenGL only includes graphics. If you wanted sound you could use OpenAL, and for networking HawkNL (formerly OpenNL), and for input you could use SDL (from what I hear).

So if you plan on making a game that is intended only to run on windows, and you do not mind using microsoft stuff use DirectX.
But if you plan on making game that is intended to run on a bunch of operating systems or you hate MS use OpenGL. Simple.

Or if you are using Dev-C++ and you can''t get DX to work use OGL (like I did).

Matthew
WebMaster
www.Matt-Land.com

#13 draqza   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:27 AM

Wow... an OpenGL vs. DirectX thread that hasn''t turned into an out-and-out flamewar and hasn''t been closed by a mod.

Personally, I prefer DX, but I''m biased because OpenGL programs don''t run right when I compile them on my computer.

#14 TheRealMAN11   Members   -  Reputation: 142

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:28 AM

Ok I forgot something. If you need any help with either one then you could use NeXe or HeHe both on gamedev. Also search the whole gamedev site for OpenGL vs DirectX or something because there have been some articles on this.

Matthew
WebMaster
www.Matt-Land.com

#15 Drizzt DoUrden   Members   -  Reputation: 100

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:29 AM

You will never learn how to du 2D games with OpenGL(until Shining Knight puts out his tutorial ) because the only tutorials are from Nehe, wihich isnt bad, but the tutorials arent good enough. They teach you a ery slight bit how to use textured quads, but not enough on how to control them, and create multiple bitmaps for games. OpenGL is better anyway in my opinion, if you can figure it out by yourself.

"I''''ve sparred with creatures from the nine hells themselves... I barely plan on breaking a sweat here, today."~Drizzt Do''''Urden

#16 Shag   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:39 AM

in reply to Drizzt ...

if you can''t use OpenGL to make a 2D game, because you can''t find a tutorial ... then maybe you should concentrate on learning to program first. quite franky, all the information you need if already on the Nehe site.

whichever API you choose ... you''ll still need to learn the same basic skills. unfortuanately this is down to the programmer, not the API. DirectX probably simplifies some tasks for 2D game creation, but it''s still down to you to write the code

#17 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 23 August 2001 - 11:43 AM

quote:
Original post by draqza
Wow... an OpenGL vs. DirectX thread that hasn''t turned into an out-and-out flamewar and hasn''t been closed by a mod.

Personally, I prefer DX, but I''m biased because OpenGL programs don''t run right when I compile them on my computer.



It''s because I gave it my blessings ;D


#18 Bully   Members   -  Reputation: 144

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 05:35 PM

quote:
original post from Drizzt DoUrden You will never learn how to du 2D games with OpenGL(until Shining Knight puts out his tutorial


Errr... I''m sure I could manage .

#19 xlauvillx   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 06:21 PM

"Now let it be clear that DirectX includes input, sound, networking, and graphics where as OpenGL only includes graphics. If you wanted sound you could use OpenAL, and for networking HawkNL (formerly OpenNL), and for input you could use SDL (from what I hear)." - TheRealMAN11

hmm, where can i find info on OpenAL, HawkNL and SDL for use in my games? anyone?

#20 Tha_HoodRat   Members   -  Reputation: 143

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 23 August 2001 - 07:12 PM

quote:
Original post by Drizzt DoUrden
bah. You people arent understandingwhat i mean. here are tutorials on programming rpgs in direct x. There are tutorials by nehe that worked fine for me. But they arent exactly for PROGRAMMING 2D games, there is one on making a 2D game, which is what I am learning from. But, my OPINION IS(geez guys, its just ym opinion) that If you intend on making a 2D game ulearn Direct X becasue you have more references. Thats all!

"I''ve sparred with creatures from the nine hells themselves... I barely plan on breaking a sweat here, today."~Drizzt Do''Urden

Edited by - Drizzt DoUrden on August 24, 2001 1:02:38 AM
The techniques required to make an rpg or whatever 2d game is constant , the only differnce is the graphics subsystem . The way I design my games is such that if I want to use DX7 I compile with DX7 subsytem headers , if I want to use OGL , DX8 or my VGA , I just plug in the correct headers and libraries.

About the OGL/D3D , I have to say , I lean more towards OGl. I can do anything I want in OGL or DX , but I find that if I need to implement a new feature, I always get it working perfectly in Ogl . It takes a while to get ''it'' working with D3d .







Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS