If you were to develop a game console...
Open GL, but I don't think you would have a choice. Direct3D is exclusive to microsoft platforms.
Not illegal, just unavailable unless you worked closely with them. You would also need to do similar for OpenGL, which would compel you to use the Mesa library.
well... You would need to license it, get microsoft's permission and I have a feeling they won't give it to you or anyone else. If they did let you use it you can bet there would be massive royalty fees... But if you don't license it and use it, then yes it's illeagal.
To use DX on a game console, your console would have to be running windows.
To make a games console that runs windows you'd obviously have to make a business deal with microsoft. It's not easy to become licensed as an OEM of a windows embedded system.
To make a games console that runs windows you'd obviously have to make a business deal with microsoft. It's not easy to become licensed as an OEM of a windows embedded system.
Quote:Original post by blakedev
You would also need to do similar for OpenGL, which would compel you to use the Mesa library.
Explain yourself.
Quote:Original post by BrioCyrain
So your saying it is illegal to use Direct3D for your console's API?
Quote:Original post by NSDuo
well... You would need to license it, get microsoft's permission and I have a feeling they won't give it to you or anyone else. If they did let you use it you can bet there would be massive royalty fees... But if you don't license it and use it, then yes it's illeagal.
No. You don't need to "license" the Direct3D API to provide it on your console. You would only need to license Microsoft's implementation, if you wanted to use it. It would be perfectly legal to use Wine's implementation of Direct3D without paying anyone for the privilege.
Quote:Original post by Hodgman
To use DX on a game console, your console would have to be running windows.
No.
Mesa is the free implementation for OpenGL.
P.S. Some people might find the imperative sentence "Explain yourself." a tad rude.
P.S. Some people might find the imperative sentence "Explain yourself." a tad rude.
Tsk, API.
PEEK and POKE of course, with a shitload of assembler code
to make it run about a thousand times faster.
PEEK and POKE of course, with a shitload of assembler code
to make it run about a thousand times faster.
<br>10 REM ENABLE POLYGON 1&2<br>20 POKE 53269,3<br>30 REM SET COLORS<br>40 POKE 53280,0:POKE 53281,2<br>50 POKE 646,15<br>60 REM BEGIN FRAME<br>70 SYS 49152<br></code><br><br><br><sub>Scary how these numbers pop up after 25 years, like it was my own</sub><br><sup>telephone number (which ironically, I don't even know by heart).</sup>
I'd build a custom API heavily styled around Direct3D, thus providing developers with a very familiar structure, while avoiding any legal discomforts. In this day and age, it'd probably be sort of a DX reimagined...in fact, it'd pretty much be SlimDX implemented in native code, with a lot of the weirdness subtracted. (I'd also go more strongly towards D3D 10, but not all the way.)
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
