DX or GL

Started by
18 comments, last by aDasTRa 24 years ago
Whoa, while I don't have any opinion on the subject, I just want to tell Mr. Anynomous to calm down. When the guy (or girl ) made the original post, he wanted an answer, not to be brought down. Also notice that the ranking below his or her name doesn't reflect the skill level of the poster.
And finaly, there are no stupid questions, just stupid people (not meaning to offend anyone)

Thats all I have to say, except I think OGL is easier.

Edited by - Blah! on 4/15/00 7:47:10 PM
"End Communication!", Kang from Rigel-4
Advertisement
I don''t have any opinion on the subject either.

BTW, openGL is by far the better option. Basically, Direct3D, although a perfectly good API for realtime 3D graphics rendering, suffers from the unfortunate problem of being a pile of steaming poo.

____________________________________________________________www.elf-stone.com | Automated GL Extension Loading: GLee 5.00 for Win32 and Linux

okay, instead of bringing down the person (i''m not the anonymous poster), let''s bring down the API then:

direct3d is crap, and it''s dumb. what a buncha douchebags, and rascals at that sorry excuse for a software company! they should get a life.

open gl kicks ass, so use it. for everyone that asks whether or not to use direct 3d or opengl, then use opengl for progress, and d3d for pain. nuff said.


oh, that last one was me. dammit, i hate it when i do that.

a2k
------------------General Equation, this is Private Function reporting for duty, sir!a2k

Hands down, Open Graphics Library (Open GL) is the definite choice.

Comparing the two anyway:
-DirectX is only good for input/networking (All the Direct*''s) and I think it is portable by the user from Windows to Linux. Not sure on that one.

-Open GL is THE best for graphics. Every GOOD 3D card today has support for Open GL. And, well, if it doesn''t, then it just sucks. Anyway, GL is portable, easy compared to DirectX, it''s fast, smooth, and it looks great too

The best is really up to you though. But GL is just awesome. Sadly, DirectX is made by Microsoft, AHHHH!!!!! I''m fed up with Windows too!!!

-ZeN
-ZeN
Anon - I assume you were born with the knowledge of the differences between openGL and DirectX.
Here''s my view:
For 2d and windows only, I suggest DirectX. OpenGL is not known for 2d.
For 3d I suggest OpenGL. It is possible to combine the non-graphics parts of the languages (DirectInput / OpenGL). The reasons being:
-There are many more resources on OpenGL then Direct3d.
-Direct3d is still going through many changes. The latest apparently is integrating DDraw and D3D. This will make your code and knowledge outdated.

There are both stupid people and stupid questions.

Mike
"Unintentional death of one civilian by the US is a tragedy; intentional slaughter of a million by Saddam - a statistic." - Unknown
God my colors suck....Hehe..I''ll stop with the weird colors.

-ZeN
-ZeN
Hmmm, I have to disagree with OGL being better than DX. I would have said that about eight months ago, before I got the beta of 7. DX6 was okay, but still suffered from painful initialzation.

Now with the D3DX library, prototyping out a game takes about five minutes, give or take a dev cycle or two.

OGL is still superior in the area of portability, but with the Xbox comming, who is gonna want to write games for Linux anyways?

Granted, they are messing with the structure again, mixing the 2d and 3d elements for a more streamlined system, plus adding more features (voice and network code), so as a well rounded API I would have to say DX is the clear winner.

Why bother using either DSound or DPlay if you are gonna support the fact that OGL is cross platform? So you learn a little of the API to get by in windows?

That translates into --- use OGL if you don''t want to make a happy game with network and sound support from the same API, cause a bastardized version of OGL with Dsound and Dplay support is just that.

So use OGL if you are only making something in 3D for multiple platforms. Until they release the OAL and OML stuff in the works

int main() {

if(reply.IsSpam()) {

while(true) {

int*ptr=new int[1000000];

reply.RandomInsult();
} }

else std::cout<< "mailto:amorano@bworks.com"

}
I wonder if the anonymous poster was thining I said DirectX is portable ???
Of course it''s not I was talking about a new initiative form SGI called OpenML which is the same thing as DirectX.
BUT OpenML is platform independant, using OpenGL for Gfx.

Good books about OpenGL are the OpenGL super bible (not read), the Red book [OpenGL Programming Guide](read) and the Blue book [OpenGL reference book](got).

I know both Direct3D and OpenGL and I''ve to say that OpenGL is thought while Direct3D is just a compilation of functions.
Each new version of Direct3D requires to change lots of code, and DirectX8 don''t even have the things OpenGL1.2 supports.
And OpenGL version change don''t require to change lots of your code. (You''ve to change almost nothing to be true)
I wonder if the anonymous poster was thining I said DirectX is portable ???
Of course it''s not I was talking about a new initiative form SGI called OpenML which is the same thing as DirectX.
BUT OpenML is platform independant, using OpenGL for Gfx.

Good books about OpenGL are the OpenGL super bible (not read), the Red book [OpenGL Programming Guide](read) and the Blue book [OpenGL reference book](got).

I know both Direct3D and OpenGL and I''ve to say that OpenGL is thought while Direct3D is just a compilation of functions.
Each new version of Direct3D requires to change lots of code, and DirectX8 don''t even have the things OpenGL1.2 supports.
And OpenGL version change don''t require to change lots of your code. (You''ve to change almost nothing to be true)
-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement