• 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
Master thief

OpenGL
Do I (really) need openGL?

16 posts in this topic

I was following some tutorials on C++ with SDL and openGL, and as I was listening to the guy he mentioned what may be a key point for me: "openGL is an interface to your video card, so you can do 3D things".

 

So I was wondering, is this entirely true? Would I ever need openGL for 2D games?

 

I'm not planning on doing anything 3D and I guess I won't be for quite some time. So if this is true I may just skip openGL learning for now and focus on what I actually need.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a wrong conclusion. Ultimately you need something to tell your video card what to show, its irrelevant if its 3D or 2D.

You could learn some other library thats less useful for 3D, but you will need to learn some library anyway and then you possibly discover later you learned something less capable or less widely used and you have to relearn.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDL can handle 2D graphics just fine (I recommend using SDL 2.0 since it has more flexibility in this regard) so you could just stick with that for the time being.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, I'm using SDL and not yet openGL but I was thinking of mixing them. So perhaps I will leave openGL aside for now, since I'm already a bit into SDL, and I may get back to it when I'm experienced enough that I can mostly write a game on my own without melting my brain.

 

I don't have a problem with learning it later. I have more of an issue with having too much to worry about now, it may become too confusing. I think I prefer to go a step at a time as they become needed.

 

Thanks both of you for your feedback.

Edited by Master thief
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned above, OpenGL is more like something that tells the video card to do something. DirectX does the same, but it is only available on Windows.

 

In a certain sense, you do need OpenGL ( or DirectX ), but you don't always have to work with its code. Ultimately, SDL, Allegro, and the other similar libraries use OpenGL ( or DirectX ), but they provide a nice layer of abstraction so you don't have to mess with the low-level things.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely sure I understand. Does that mean these libraries may have "something" related to openGL within them?

Edited by Master thief
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely sure I understand. Does that mean these libraries may have "something" related to openGL within them?

 

Yes, they are running on top of OpenGL, it means that they utilize it to render things on the screen. OpenGL and Direct3D are libraries, providing API to your video card hardware, this is true. The whole thing about 3D vs 2D is irrelevant, since they are essentially the same, they just utilize different projection matrices and coordinates.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I see. I remember now that some people made some actual 3D renderings with flash ActionScript 2, even though it was never intended to support it. And now that I think about it, it makes sense, since openGL (or any other such library) basically uses "raw" C++ (or the associated language) to achieve what it does.

 

So I guess it basically comes down to "do I need a video card or not?". Would a game made solely with SDL or Allegro (or FSML) only ever use the CPU? (considering that I wouldn't know how to deal with a video card on my own, purely with C++, I would assume so)

 

And just by the way, would you consider using the video card for even 2D games like say, a tetris clone, or an adventure game based on static images, or a platformer like Metal Slug)? I ask this just because I'm wondering when will I cross the line between good performace just using the CPU and the need for a little help from the video card.

 

Sorry if I'm asking lots of questions, I just want to have a consistent understanding of what I'm doing and what I'm dealing with.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the 2D/3D: most 2D/3D related calculations can easily be extended (A 2D vector addition can also be done as a 3D addition with the last element zero) and most API's accept 2D data as well.  This means that you can perfectly use the OpenGL/Direct3D or any abstraction (SDL/SFML/Allegro...) for 2D games and still utilize the power of the GPU. Given that a GPU has a raw processing power that is far beyond a CPU's, even for simple 2D games like platformers I'd recommend using it.

 

About the "do I need a videocard"; the whole pipeline goes a little like this:

Application <-> (optional) Abstraction layer (such as SDL) <-> OpenGL/DirectX <-> Video Drivers <-> Hardware

 

This means that if there is a video driver that uses the CPU instead of the GPU; then you can run a game without a videocard but given the fact that the CPU has a lot less processing power (but is a lot more flexible) it probably won't be very smooth.

 

The hardware (GPU's) are there because they offer enormous amounts of power,

The drivers are there because every hardware is different and every vendor has their own architectures, (and because of this writing code directly for one GPU architecture is a very bad idea!)

The OpenGL/Direct3D api's are there because they standardize calls: you don't want vendors to include their own special features so you have to write your graphics code only once to run on all GPU's that support a certain OpenGL/Direct3D level,

The abstraction layers are there because the OpenGL and Direct3D API's are suited for all possible graphics applications and libraries such as SDL make certain applications easier (and often provide other features such as input handling which a graphics API doesn't provide).

Edited by Miklas
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I see. I remember now that some people made some actual 3D renderings with flash ActionScript 2, even though it was never intended to support it. And now that I think about it, it makes sense, since openGL (or any other such library) basically uses "raw" C++ (or the associated language) to achieve what it does.

 

So I guess it basically comes down to "do I need a video card or not?". Would a game made solely with SDL or Allegro (or FSML) only ever use the CPU? (considering that I wouldn't know how to deal with a video card on my own, purely with C++, I would assume so)

 

And just by the way, would you consider using the video card for even 2D games like say, a tetris clone, or an adventure game based on static images, or a platformer like Metal Slug)? I ask this just because I'm wondering when will I cross the line between good performace just using the CPU and the need for a little help from the video card.

 

Sorry if I'm asking lots of questions, I just want to have a consistent understanding of what I'm doing and what I'm dealing with.

 

Well, I can't even imagine the situation where you don't have graphics card on user desktop with friendly OS. It is integrated into motherboard, into CPU or discrete. CPU alone couldn't process modern OS user interface and maintain the good performing business logic at the same time, because rendering task is extremely hard if you do not parallelize it by means of additional accelerator.

 

I think you are confusing general C++ concepts with GPU concepts. GPU is a SIMD processing unit, which has its own driver from manufacturer, which hides hardware specifications and provide more friendly and common interfaces to OpenGL and Direct3D. C++ doesn't have to do anything with GPU, it just manages GPU through some kind of interface, provided by video card's manufacturer.

 

Regarding 2D games. You can use whatever game engine you want, but know this - they will utilize OpenGL or Direct3D in order to present your game onto the screen. Usually those kind of engines are providing simple user-friendly interface and hide rendering mechanism, but at the end of the day, even emulated or "software" rendering will be presented on your screen by means of video card, thus utilizing OpenGL or Direct3D on OS level.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm afraid some of these posts are a little misleading.

SDL and it's ilk are not written on top of OpenGL. SDL can be used to get an OpenGL context, but SDL itself does not use OpenGL.

If you're using SDL without OpenGL, you end up drawing to a frame buffer, bypassing the GPU entirely. The way a frame buffer works depends on the OS and the underlying hardware. On many computers, the GPU also ends up drawing to a framebuffer, and all framebuffers are rendered directly to the screen by a video chip (not a GPU).

Either way, if you write pure SDL code, you're not using OpenGL or the GPU.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, if you write pure SDL code, you're not using OpenGL or the GPU.

 

Don't be so sure about that.  A modern OS will use either OpenGL or D3D to even accelerate it's desktop rendering, so ultimately, and even if you do a completely pure software renderer, the OS itself will be sending it through a 3D API which will use the GPU.  It may be just "put all of this into a render target and present it", or it may be further up the pipeline, but while you may not be using it directly yourself, you don't have control over what the OS does.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I've heard, perhaps incorrectly, that SDL 2 uses OpenGL by default.

 

There are two ways to render with SDL 2, one via the old surface API and one with the accelerated rendering API. The latter will use D3D on Windows by default, OpenGL or OpenGL ES elsewhere, and a software renderer when neither available. The renderer is configurable during initialization so, for example, an OpenGL renderer can be created on Windows.

 

In practice, though, I've noticed a lot of people on the SDL mailing list recommending just avoiding the rendering API and create your own in OpenGL, using SDL for context creation and event management. As I understand it, there were some restrictions on the implementation in order to keep the software renderer on par with the hardware stuff. That may change in the future. For now, it's usable for simple 2D (probably for a wide range of games), but anyone wanting to take advantage of the hardware for special effects would need to roll their own.

1

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

  • Similar Content

    • By Toastmastern
      So it's been a while since I took a break from my whole creating a planet in DX11. Last time around I got stuck on fixing a nice LOD.
      A week back or so I got help to find this:
      https://github.com/sp4cerat/Planet-LOD
      In general this is what I'm trying to recreate in DX11, he that made that planet LOD uses OpenGL but that is a minor issue and something I can solve. But I have a question regarding the code
      He gets the position using this row
      vec4d pos = b.var.vec4d["position"]; Which is then used further down when he sends the variable "center" into the drawing function:
      if (pos.len() < 1) pos.norm(); world::draw(vec3d(pos.x, pos.y, pos.z));  
      Inside the draw function this happens:
      draw_recursive(p3[0], p3[1], p3[2], center); Basically the 3 vertices of the triangle and the center of details that he sent as a parameter earlier: vec3d(pos.x, pos.y, pos.z)
      Now onto my real question, he does vec3d edge_center[3] = { (p1 + p2) / 2, (p2 + p3) / 2, (p3 + p1) / 2 }; to get the edge center of each edge, nothing weird there.
      But this is used later on with:
      vec3d d = center + edge_center[i]; edge_test[i] = d.len() > ratio_size; edge_test is then used to evaluate if there should be a triangle drawn or if it should be split up into 3 new triangles instead. Why is it working for him? shouldn't it be like center - edge_center or something like that? Why adding them togheter? I asume here that the center is the center of details for the LOD. the position of the camera if stood on the ground of the planet and not up int he air like it is now.

      Full code can be seen here:
      https://github.com/sp4cerat/Planet-LOD/blob/master/src.simple/Main.cpp
      If anyone would like to take a look and try to help me understand this code I would love this person. I'm running out of ideas on how to solve this in my own head, most likely twisted it one time to many up in my head
      Thanks in advance
      Toastmastern
       
       
    • By fllwr0491
      I googled around but are unable to find source code or details of implementation.
      What keywords should I search for this topic?
      Things I would like to know:
      A. How to ensure that partially covered pixels are rasterized?
         Apparently by expanding each triangle by 1 pixel or so, rasterization problem is almost solved.
         But it will result in an unindexable triangle list without tons of overlaps. Will it incur a large performance penalty?
      B. A-buffer like bitmask needs a read-modiry-write operation.
         How to ensure proper synchronizations in GLSL?
         GLSL seems to only allow int32 atomics on image.
      C. Is there some simple ways to estimate coverage on-the-fly?
         In case I am to draw 2D shapes onto an exisitng target:
         1. A multi-pass whatever-buffer seems overkill.
         2. Multisampling could cost a lot memory though all I need is better coverage.
            Besides, I have to blit twice, if draw target is not multisampled.
       
    • By mapra99
      Hello

      I am working on a recent project and I have been learning how to code in C# using OpenGL libraries for some graphics. I have achieved some quite interesting things using TAO Framework writing in Console Applications, creating a GLUT Window. But my problem now is that I need to incorporate the Graphics in a Windows Form so I can relate the objects that I render with some .NET Controls.

      To deal with this problem, I have seen in some forums that it's better to use OpenTK instead of TAO Framework, so I can use the glControl that OpenTK libraries offer. However, I haven't found complete articles, tutorials or source codes that help using the glControl or that may insert me into de OpenTK functions. Would somebody please share in this forum some links or files where I can find good documentation about this topic? Or may I use another library different of OpenTK?

      Thanks!
    • By Solid_Spy
      Hello, I have been working on SH Irradiance map rendering, and I have been using a GLSL pixel shader to render SH irradiance to 2D irradiance maps for my static objects. I already have it working with 9 3D textures so far for the first 9 SH functions.
      In my GLSL shader, I have to send in 9 SH Coefficient 3D Texures that use RGBA8 as a pixel format. RGB being used for the coefficients for red, green, and blue, and the A for checking if the voxel is in use (for the 3D texture solidification shader to prevent bleeding).
      My problem is, I want to knock this number of textures down to something like 4 or 5. Getting even lower would be a godsend. This is because I eventually plan on adding more SH Coefficient 3D Textures for other parts of the game map (such as inside rooms, as opposed to the outside), to circumvent irradiance probe bleeding between rooms separated by walls. I don't want to reach the 32 texture limit too soon. Also, I figure that it would be a LOT faster.
      Is there a way I could, say, store 2 sets of SH Coefficients for 2 SH functions inside a texture with RGBA16 pixels? If so, how would I extract them from inside GLSL? Let me know if you have any suggestions ^^.
    • By KarimIO
      EDIT: I thought this was restricted to Attribute-Created GL contexts, but it isn't, so I rewrote the post.
      Hey guys, whenever I call SwapBuffers(hDC), I get a crash, and I get a "Too many posts were made to a semaphore." from Windows as I call SwapBuffers. What could be the cause of this?
      Update: No crash occurs if I don't draw, just clear and swap.
      static PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR pfd = // pfd Tells Windows How We Want Things To Be { sizeof(PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR), // Size Of This Pixel Format Descriptor 1, // Version Number PFD_DRAW_TO_WINDOW | // Format Must Support Window PFD_SUPPORT_OPENGL | // Format Must Support OpenGL PFD_DOUBLEBUFFER, // Must Support Double Buffering PFD_TYPE_RGBA, // Request An RGBA Format 32, // Select Our Color Depth 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, // Color Bits Ignored 0, // No Alpha Buffer 0, // Shift Bit Ignored 0, // No Accumulation Buffer 0, 0, 0, 0, // Accumulation Bits Ignored 24, // 24Bit Z-Buffer (Depth Buffer) 0, // No Stencil Buffer 0, // No Auxiliary Buffer PFD_MAIN_PLANE, // Main Drawing Layer 0, // Reserved 0, 0, 0 // Layer Masks Ignored }; if (!(hDC = GetDC(windowHandle))) return false; unsigned int PixelFormat; if (!(PixelFormat = ChoosePixelFormat(hDC, &pfd))) return false; if (!SetPixelFormat(hDC, PixelFormat, &pfd)) return false; hRC = wglCreateContext(hDC); if (!hRC) { std::cout << "wglCreateContext Failed!\n"; return false; } if (wglMakeCurrent(hDC, hRC) == NULL) { std::cout << "Make Context Current Second Failed!\n"; return false; } ... // OGL Buffer Initialization glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT | GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); glBindVertexArray(vao); glUseProgram(myprogram); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, indexCount, GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, (void *)indexStart); SwapBuffers(GetDC(window_handle));  
  • Popular Now