• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL On popularity of OpenGL.

This topic is 4255 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Just a passing thought... If OpenGL is as famous as we are told, then why do 99% of the games require DirectX runtime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Guest Anonymous Poster
Most commercial games use D3D instead of OpenGL. But even if they used OpenGL for graphics, they still could be using DirectSound or Input, etc, and still require the DirectX runtime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi , what game do you talk about ?
only PC plateform ?
DirectX isn't on Playstation neither PSP ...isn't on Gamecube...ect..ect..

OpenGL is multi plateform and that'is an advantage against directX

In my case , i really manage directX and its API but i want to manage now the OpenGL api for portability purpose.

I'm getting in trouble because in OpenGL there isn't D3DX function helpers , you must implement your own math library and i must say that it is a good practice to better understand computer graphics...

i'm okay to say not reinvent the wheel but you must understand the wheel so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I meant 99% of commercial games, not specifically from Microsoft Game Studios.
Nini's post indicated as if DirectX is lot easiro than OpenGL. Is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by horizon981
No, I meant 99% of commercial games, not specifically from Microsoft Game Studios.
Nini's post indicated as if DirectX is lot easiro than OpenGL. Is it?


i reaffirm that DirectX is a lot easier cause they have the D3DX Library, a whole file format ready for playing with (.X) , image loading, math library , you only have to call a function to do a SLERP ect.. ect...

If you know programming and have little knowledge about math you can program with DX but not with OpenGL ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by nini
If you know programming and have little knowledge about math you can program with DX but not with OpenGL ...


What a ridiculous statement. For one OpenGL CANNOT be compared to DirectX as a whole, if you want to compare to Direct3D fair enough. Also anyone with knowledge of programming and a little math can use OpenGL. Don't believe me ask any one of the thousands of people on these forums who used OpenGL before Direct3D. I would ask anyone interested to skim through the tutorials on Nehe just to get an idea of how OpenGL works and then make their own opinion. Granted, Direct3D does have the .X format to play with, and so maybe it is quicker to get 3D models onto the screen, but at somepoint every beginner needs to learn how 3D file formats work, so why not learn alongside OpenGL and gain some understanding?

Many games on Windows do require the DirectX runtime, this is not neccessarily because they dont use OpenGL, DirectX is a collection of APIs for different jobs, OpenGL is a graphics API only and can be used alongside the other DirectX APIs.

The choice to use Direct3D over OpenGL is personal preference rather than anything else, each has its strengths and weaknesses. I use OpenGL because I run Linux, but friends use Windows so I write my apps cross-platform. (Using SDL for window creation/input and OpenAL for sound instead of DirectX's Windows only API)


Luke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by horizon981
No, I meant 99% of commercial games, not specifically from Microsoft Game Studios.


As Kazade already pointed out, 99% may use DirectX but only for DirectInput, DirectSound... I'd wager less than 95% use it for Direct3D, with a downward trend, so a direct comparison is difficult. Look at Doom 3, it lists DirectX as requirement but the renderer used is OpenGL. Many other games, such as UT and Deus Ex, also have OpenGL renderers, sometimes exclusive, sometimes switchable with D3D.

Also, afaik, once you stop talking about games and start talking about enterprise software, OpenGL is the accepted standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Kazade

If you know programming and have little knowledge about math you can program with DX but not with OpenGL ...

What a ridiculous statement. For one OpenGL CANNOT be compared to DirectX as a whole, if you want to compare to Direct3D fair enough. Also anyone with knowledge of programming and a little math can use OpenGL

Luke.


don't play with the words , in my particular case , i must investigate the math in order to do the same things with opengl that i easily do with the help of D3DX (only have to know what a slerp is but not how to do it mathematically)

if you want to compute normals simply use D3DXComputeNormals...blah blah blah...
if you want to have progressive mesh there is a pretty simple interface to do it...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well my opinion on this is the target market, kind of like how there is a small margin of gamers on linux. Children, their parents, and their grandparents are using mostly windows for non-server use - an OS that's a safe bet in the gaming market. This is why I'm writing my programs to take use of both API's.

I wouldn't use famous as the right word, popular amongst beginners and experts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by horizon981
Just a passing thought...
If OpenGL is as famous as we are told, then why do 99% of the games require DirectX runtime?



This is like asking why 99% of people use paper plates at a BBQ. Regardless of the BBQ-addict's highly subjective view:

1) Not everyone uses paper plates at BBQs
2) Not everyone BBQs, they sometimes put forth actual effort in their cuisine :)

For every copy of every D3D-based game, there are 10 scientists using OpenGL to create the world that allows for entertainment in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4255 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Similar Content

    • By LifeArtist
      Good Evening,
      I want to make a 2D game which involves displaying some debug information. Especially for collision, enemy sights and so on ...
      First of I was thinking about all those shapes which I need will need for debugging purposes: circles, rectangles, lines, polygons.
      I am really stucked right now because of the fundamental question:
      Where do I store my vertices positions for each line (object)? Currently I am not using a model matrix because I am using orthographic projection and set the final position within the VBO. That means that if I add a new line I would have to expand the "points" array and re-upload (recall glBufferData) it every time. The other method would be to use a model matrix and a fixed vbo for a line but it would be also messy to exactly create a line from (0,0) to (100,20) calculating the rotation and scale to make it fit.
      If I proceed with option 1 "updating the array each frame" I was thinking of having 4 draw calls every frame for the lines vao, polygons vao and so on. 
      In addition to that I am planning to use some sort of ECS based architecture. So the other question would be:
      Should I treat those debug objects as entities/components?
      For me it would make sense to treat them as entities but that's creates a new issue with the previous array approach because it would have for example a transform and render component. A special render component for debug objects (no texture etc) ... For me the transform component is also just a matrix but how would I then define a line?
      Treating them as components would'nt be a good idea in my eyes because then I would always need an entity. Well entity is just an id !? So maybe its a component?
      Regards,
      LifeArtist
    • By QQemka
      Hello. I am coding a small thingy in my spare time. All i want to achieve is to load a heightmap (as the lowest possible walking terrain), some static meshes (elements of the environment) and a dynamic character (meaning i can move, collide with heightmap/static meshes and hold a varying item in a hand ). Got a bunch of questions, or rather problems i can't find solution to myself. Nearly all are deal with graphics/gpu, not the coding part. My c++ is on high enough level.
      Let's go:
      Heightmap - i obviously want it to be textured, size is hardcoded to 256x256 squares. I can't have one huge texture stretched over entire terrain cause every pixel would be enormous. Thats why i decided to use 2 specified textures. First will be a tileset consisting of 16 square tiles (u v range from 0 to 0.25 for first tile and so on) and second a 256x256 buffer with 0-15 value representing index of the tile from tileset for every heigtmap square. Problem is, how do i blend the edges nicely and make some computationally cheap changes so its not obvious there are only 16 tiles? Is it possible to generate such terrain with some existing program?
      Collisions - i want to use bounding sphere and aabb. But should i store them for a model or entity instance? Meaning i have 20 same trees spawned using the same tree model, but every entity got its own transformation (position, scale etc). Storing collision component per instance grats faster access + is precalculated and transformed (takes additional memory, but who cares?), so i stick with this, right? What should i do if object is dynamically rotated? The aabb is no longer aligned and calculating per vertex min/max everytime object rotates/scales is pretty expensive, right?
      Drawing aabb - problem similar to above (storing aabb data per instance or model). This time in my opinion per model is enough since every instance also does not have own vertex buffer but uses the shared one (so 20 trees share reference to one tree model). So rendering aabb is about taking the model's aabb, transforming with instance matrix and voila. What about aabb vertex buffer (this is more of a cosmetic question, just curious, bumped onto it in time of writing this). Is it better to make it as 8 points and index buffer (12 lines), or only 2 vertices with min/max x/y/z and having the shaders dynamically generate 6 other vertices and draw the box? Or maybe there should be just ONE 1x1x1 cube box template moved/scaled per entity?
      What if one model got a diffuse texture and a normal map, and other has only diffuse? Should i pass some bool flag to shader with that info, or just assume that my game supports only diffuse maps without fancy stuff?
      There were several more but i forgot/solved them at time of writing
      Thanks in advance
    • By RenanRR
      Hi All,
      I'm reading the tutorials from learnOpengl site (nice site) and I'm having a question on the camera (https://learnopengl.com/Getting-started/Camera).
      I always saw the camera being manipulated with the lookat, but in tutorial I saw the camera being changed through the MVP arrays, which do not seem to be camera, but rather the scene that changes:
      Vertex Shader:
      #version 330 core layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos; layout (location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; uniform mat4 model; uniform mat4 view; uniform mat4 projection; void main() { gl_Position = projection * view * model * vec4(aPos, 1.0f); TexCoord = vec2(aTexCoord.x, aTexCoord.y); } then, the matrix manipulated:
      ..... glm::mat4 projection = glm::perspective(glm::radians(fov), (float)SCR_WIDTH / (float)SCR_HEIGHT, 0.1f, 100.0f); ourShader.setMat4("projection", projection); .... glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(cameraPos, cameraPos + cameraFront, cameraUp); ourShader.setMat4("view", view); .... model = glm::rotate(model, glm::radians(angle), glm::vec3(1.0f, 0.3f, 0.5f)); ourShader.setMat4("model", model);  
      So, some doubts:
      - Why use it like that?
      - Is it okay to manipulate the camera that way?
      -in this way, are not the vertex's positions that changes instead of the camera?
      - I need to pass MVP to all shaders of object in my scenes ?
       
      What it seems, is that the camera stands still and the scenery that changes...
      it's right?
       
       
      Thank you
       
    • By dpadam450
      Sampling a floating point texture where the alpha channel holds 4-bytes of packed data into the float. I don't know how to cast the raw memory to treat it as an integer so I can perform bit-shifting operations.

      int rgbValue = int(textureSample.w);//4 bytes of data packed as color
      // algorithm might not be correct and endianness might need switching.
      vec3 extractedData = vec3(  rgbValue & 0xFF000000,  (rgbValue << 8) & 0xFF000000, (rgbValue << 16) & 0xFF000000);
      extractedData /= 255.0f;
    • By Devashish Khandelwal
      While writing a simple renderer using OpenGL, I faced an issue with the glGetUniformLocation function. For some reason, the location is coming to be -1.
      Anyone has any idea .. what should I do?
  • Advertisement