Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

XzenoX

OpenGL SDL or OpenGL

Recommended Posts

We are full time students(4 of us), we plan on building a game, we will be 2 programmers and 2 artists, we planned building the game using graphics similar to Final Fantasy Tactic(combat part where your characters move freely x,y,z) or to Dragon Warrior 7(speaking of the redone version on PSX since i haven''t seen the original) which uses similar graphics in cities/caves/etc They both seem to have x,y,z axis but yet the sprites are 2d, how did they do that ? and how could we do that ? SDL seems a good choice for portability but how do you manage to do 3d graphics using SDL library? I''m not stating a debate on which one is the best, just which one is the best in these cases. Tnx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
SDL _or_ OpenGL ?!

You mean: SDL and OpenGL...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good questions...

First of all, SDL is neither a 3d or 2d API. The whole point of SDL is to provide access to the screen in a portable manner. It lacks 2d rotation, scaling, etc algorithms. You'll have to figure those out yourself.

Additionally, you can make OpenGL calls that render to SDL bitmaps, meaning SDL works with OpenGL. OpenGL is a graphics API. It doesn't render images to the screen on its own. It needs a helper API with access to the screen so it can do its work. GLUT, GLAUX, WinAPI and SDL are all such helper APIs. OpenGL will calculate the mechanics of rotation, scaling, translation, etc.

Hmm, I have a vague recollection of Final Fantasy tactics. As far as I remember it was an isometric game, like Diablo. In other words it is meant to look 3d, but it isn't.

You accomplish this by taking square tiles and rotating them 45 degrees, also squashing them to look better. The tiles are regular 2d bitmaps, albeit only rotated. The characters 2d images drawn to look like they're 3d; just bitmaps drawn at isometric angles. Look up isometric game development for more information. This is how it is tiled, with rotated tiles fitting into each other like a puzzle:

<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>

Every even row is offset by tile_width/2. This representation is crude, because the tiles have space in between them. Normally they should fit each other like a glove. The <> is the basic shape of a tile...

Have fun!

Edited by - Anesthesia on January 3, 2002 5:20:48 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can use OpenGL with SDL very easily, there's a slight difference in a few calls like buffer flipping (you have to call something like SDL_OpenGL_Flip() instead of the normal function). Other than that, you can use OpenGL just as you would without SDL.


quote:
Original post by Anesthesia

Additionally, you can make OpenGL calls that render to SDL bitmaps, meaning SDL works with OpenGL. OpenGL is a graphics API. It doesn't render images to the screen on its own. It needs a helper API with access to the screen so it can do its work. GLUT, GLAUX, WinAPI and SDL are all such helper APIs. OpenGL will calculate the mechanics of rotation, scaling, translation, etc.



That's not exactly true. OpenGL does render on its own, it just needs a window to render to (much like DirectX has to anchor itself to a window), that's all. SDL merely provides a handle and a rendering context to OpenGL. I may be a bit off because I haven't really used OpenGL directly with Windows much, I just went through SDL for the most part but I should have the right idea there. Basically what I'm trying to say is, OpenGL doesn't have to go through another API to draw stuff. This would defeat the whole purpose of OpenGL which is meant to speed up drawing by accessing hardware directly (like DirectX does).



Edited by - Supernova on January 3, 2002 5:27:44 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously, you misunderstood my comment. Allow me to clarify. OpenGL DOES render indeed, it even has its own drivers to help accomplish this feat AND directly to the hardware as well BUT it does NOT do so on its own. OpenGL lacks OS-specific features in the name of portability. It needs specific information from the OS on how it should operate and once it has that information it goes with it.

What I was trying to point out is that there are no OpenGL calls to do things like create bitmaps, take care of double-buffering, etc. It's a somewhat complicated issue, but I only intended to say that because of portability reasons, OpenGL does not work on its own.

SDL, BTW, doesn't operate independently either. It is a portability layer and uses APIs from various OSes to get at the hardware.

Here is the fallacy of your logic:
"OpenGL does render on its own, it just needs a window to render to (much like DirectX has to anchor itself to a window), that's all."

To Paraphrase:
It renders on its own, but it needs something in order to render. Prime contradiction. Obviously if it is in need, then it is not independent ;-)

As far as I'm concerned, the act of rendering has the end-result of something visible on screen.

Q: If a tree fell in OpenGL and no one saw it for a lack of SDL, did it really fall?
A: No, because the code didn't compile

So don't needlessly complicate things. OpenGL cannot produce any *visible* results without a helper. SDL, GLAUX, GLU, etc are such helpers. I hope that is a more logical statement to you. Code will not even work without a rendering context, which OpenGL cannot provide.





Edited by - Anesthesia on January 3, 2002 6:25:59 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, what I really meant to comment on was "OpenGL will calculate the mechanics of rotation, scaling, translation, etc." because it sounds like you''re implying that''s the only thing it does. And yeah, I know SDL uses DirectX under Windows. So I guess it was a bit of a misunderstanding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:

Hmm, I have a vague recollection of Final Fantasy tactics. As far as I remember it was an isometric game, like Diablo. In other words it is meant to look 3d, but it isn''t.

You accomplish this by taking square tiles and rotating them 45 degrees, also squashing them to look better. The tiles are regular 2d bitmaps, albeit only rotated. The characters 2d images drawn to look like they''re 3d; just bitmaps drawn at isometric angles. Look up isometric game development for more information. This is how it is tiled, with rotated tiles fitting into each other like a puzzle:

<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><
><><><><><><><>

Every even row is offset by tile_width/2. This representation is crude, because the tiles have space in between them. Normally they should fit each other like a glove. The <> is the basic shape of a tile...

Have fun!

Edited by - Anesthesia on January 3, 2002 5:20:48 PM



Yea, isometric engines have to be the second best invention, next to pizza of coarse!


"1-2GB of virtual memory, that''s way more than i''ll ever need!" - Bill Gates
"The Adventure: Quite possibly the game of the century!" - The Gaming Community

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TNX !
That helped a lot, didn''t new of those isometric things, i''ll be looking foward to it ^_^, tnx

I''ll read on OpenGL and SDL too since these 2 seem to work great together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have one more thing to add here. If you are making a 2d game you could use opengl or sdl for the graphics stuff, but if you don''t need any rotation or scaling featurs, then sdl would be the better choice to use. I started a 2d game intended to run on an older system using opengl for graphics, and it ran very slow, so I switched to sdl which nearly doubled the frame rate. So I would recommend using sdl for graphics (and sound and input for that matter).


It is foolish for a wise man to be silent, but wise for a fool.

Matthew
WebMaster
www.Matt-Land.com

All your Xbox base are belong to Nintendo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose you''re right SuperNova about it looking like I was saying that''s all it does. Thank you for helping to clarify that.

TheREALMan11 has a point. Considering that you want to do an isometric game, you don''t absolutely need OpenGL. It will hamper your performance on machines without 3d acceleration. Some people think that it''s cool to add 3d effects to their 2d games (like Blizzard with Diablo II and Glide - another now useless API), and others think it''s nicer simply to blit the image onto a polygon, so that all of the rotation, scaling etc can be taken care of with OpenGL calls, and they''ll be 3d accelerated as well.

That''s why it helps to determine what the target system is and moreover whether or not you want to require people to use a 3d Accelerated API to play a 2d game.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      627719
    • Total Posts
      2978789
  • Similar Content

    • By DelicateTreeFrog
      Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
      Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
      For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
      So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
      Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
      The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
      So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
      With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!
    • By JJCDeveloper
      I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks
    • By AyeRonTarpas
      A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

      -What I'm using:
          C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.  
      -Questions
      Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?  
    • By ferreiradaselva
      Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using `glMapBuffer()`, which works fine.
      But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using `glMapBufferRange()`, which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
      Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
    • By xhcao
      Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness. 
  • Popular Now