• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ATC

Best way to manage render targets, buffers, etc...?

6 posts in this topic

Up late, doing some more work on the engine. And I just started questioning the way I've done things in the past... wondering if there is not a better way than the approach I currently take. I'm wanting to know the best way for the engine to manage its render targets, depth stencils, viewports, etc...

[b]FYI:[/b] The engine is completely written in C#, and is built upon a data-driven architecture. It is also fully platform-agnostic and API-agnostic, so I must take care to ensure what I do works across DirectX 10 - 11 and OpenGL (as well as custom software renderers and 3rd party back-ends).

Attached to my post is an example diagram which shows how a platform-specific implementation of the "Renderer" interface (in this case the D3D10 implementation) "plugs in" to the engine. I added this to give you an idea of how the code is structured. Now tell me, if you please, how I need to be managing my render targets, depth stencils and all such things...

[b]EDIT:[/b] Note that in the diagram the "Engine" and "Application" parts are NOT actually classes... they are simply representative of how things sort of fit together. Edited by ATC
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='ATC' timestamp='1349587275' post='4987588']
Now tell me, if you please, how I need to be managing my render targets, depth stencils and all such things...
[/quote]

The "right thing to do" would depend heavilly on the game type that you have in mind. If you're just looking to make some general utilities to communicate with the GPU, via OpenGL or DirectX, then you could do that in the "Renderer" subsystem; Concepts like "render target" and "depth stencil" can be modeled into abstractions that will "do the right thing", regardless of the underlying graphics API.

That said: I would recommend building games, not engines.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Goran Milovanovic' timestamp='1349660464' post='4987824']
The "right thing to do" would depend heavilly on the game type that you have in mind. If you're just looking to make some general utilities to communicate with the GPU, via OpenGL or DirectX, then you could do that in the "Renderer" subsystem; Concepts like "render target" and "depth stencil" can be modeled into abstractions that will "do the right thing", regardless of the underlying graphics API.
[/quote]

I agree... I'm leaning towards the idea of allowing my agnostic "GraphicsManager" class to manage an abstracted form of render targets, depth stencils, etc... and a derrived Renderer implementation can translate the parameters and turn it into usable, API-specific objects...

[quote name='Goran Milovanovic' timestamp='1349660464' post='4987824']
That said: I would recommend building games, not engines.
[/quote]

This is, in truth, generally good advice. But doesn't apply to everyone. Sometimes writing a good free-standing engine can be incredibly profitable; both financially and through productivity of actual [i]game[/i] development.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='phantom' timestamp='1349690628' post='4987931']
I've seen what happens when a group of people, who have experiance with making games, try to do just that...
[/quote]
I've seen the same happens once too, it is like target practising without target. Edited by Ashaman73
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You guys are correct... not going to argue against your remarks. But rest assured this engine isn't one of those "shell" projects (an engine that just exists for the sake of being an engine)... As of right now development is fairly generalized. But we shift gears as the engine grows. Right now we're not writing games but working towards developing some very complex demos, sample apps and mini-games to test all fronts and bases of the engine. And by "complex" scenes I mean, for example, an outdoor scene with 100Sq.km of terrain, night/day cycles, wildlife, growing vegetation, bodies of water (filled with fish), fully rigged/animated characters, AI, etc... These sorts of demos/samples ensure everything a next-gen game or simulation might want to do will not only work but work very well and run very fast -- and it takes a fraction of the time a complete, marketable game takes yet still satisfies the need for proofing the engine. Writing such demos and samples will be [i]evolving into[/i] full-blown games and simulations as the capacity for producing them matures. I've been working on this for 5+ years, and I've found that this works best for me. Essentially it is the same thing you suggest, but I prefer to let the games/apps evolve into bigger and better things and grow with the engine.

[b]@ L.Spiro:[/b]

Thanks again! I always enjoy reading your posts and I like your website as well. I have a lot of respect for you as a programmer. :-)

Yes, C# does indeed allow #if/#else/#define/etc... My code base actually has a very small number of "#ifs", and they are all oriented towards debugging, bounds checking, etc... For instance (contrived example):

public void SetTexture( Texture2D texture ) {
#if DEBUG || PERFORM_CHECKS
if(texture == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("texture");
#endif

this.Texture = texture;
}

I actually have TOTALLY avoided anything like this:

#if OPEN_GL
// ...
#elif DIRECTX
//...
#endif

...we simply do not do this at all. We make one build per target platform; and by "platform" I mean hardware itself... one build for desktop/laptop, one for XBox, one for PS3, one for iPhone, etc. The engine can switch between OpenGL and DirectX versions and entire APIs at runtime. The design is capable of hosting a game on Windows, for example, where the user can select whether the game runs on DirectX or OpenGL and can switch this setting whilst playing the game.

Your example of "CTextureBase" describes how virtually everything works... from Renderer implementations to Shader and Material implementations. Thank you for describing this, however, as your words are quite helpful. I think I've about gotten this figured out. When I'm done with the re-write I'll let you guys know if I had any problems and/or share my solutions.

Regards,

--ATC--
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0