• 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.

Archived

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

ToFuSoup

DirectDraw?? soon to be obsolete??

13 posts in this topic

Hi, I''ve been programming games for a long time, but I''ve always used someone else''s directX wrappers. I was just starting to learn directX (Direct Draw actually) myself, and I just read that microsoft is ditching DirectDraw, and having everything done through DirectGraphics/Direct3D? So I was wondering if you think it''s still a good idea to learn directdraw, or should I try to just learn DirectGraphics/Direct3D?? TIA
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode. I miself thoufg, would learn both DDraw and DirectGrafics(D3D), along with everything else. Could this tern into a war about 2D grafics, like gl vs. d3d?

- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
btw, this has been posted before, and lead to a decent discussion, search for it if interrested.

basically to sum it up.

microsoft did not ditch directdraw. you will be able to use it even if ppl install dx1723, simply because dx is backwards compatible. video manufacturers are not adding anymore 2d features to their video cards so there is no need to update the interfaces. ms saw this as an oppurtunity to clean up d3d and make things more competitive by making d3d easier to use. ms redesigned d3d and now is MUCH easier to create 3d apps using dx8.

d3d CANT replace directdraw. it simple is not possible. most per pixel effects cannot by done using d3d.

video players have no reason to use d3d, especially since many cards out there cant handle extremly large textures. directdraw also supplies some acceleration as well to video apps. yuv is done in hardware and other things like video ports help ensure the video card does more work and frees up the cpu.

you should learn both. because no matter what ppl say, 3d games are the rage and is what the mainstream public want. d3d can accelerate tile based games very well and help with alpha blending in those apps. while i ussually perfer the 2d look, video cards are getting to the point with cell shading that a 3d game can almost look as good as some older 2d titles.

some specialized 2d apps though are best left to directdraw. these include video players, visual plugins that do per pixel effects, etc.

i learned both, and it helps.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode


HA HA HA HA HA!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i hope not!!! i''ve loved directdraw very much, although at first i wasn''t... hm... if i learned d3d will i love it too? am just scared to learn it though as of now...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by a person
d3d CANT replace directdraw. it simple is not possible. most per pixel effects cannot by done using d3d.




Im pretty sure thats why Vertex/pixel shaders exist. They will do all of that.


-----------------------------
The sad thing about artificial intelligence is that it lacks artifice and therefore intelligence.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by krez
[quote]Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode


HA HA HA HA HA!
HA HA HA HA HA?



- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode...
***
me: HA HA HA HA HA!
***
you: HA HA HA HA HA?


yes, i said, "HA HA HA HA HA!"
do i really have to explain? that always ruins the joke...
i''ll just give a hint: are you doing 3D in "da'' 13h mode"? or do you just program nothing?
again, HA HA HA HA HA!
i really shouldn''t be so disrespectful as to make fun of an "aldschooler" like yourself.... heh heh...

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeh.. OK. Maby your right. I do sound kind of self-centerd there . Just ignore plese.

- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
promit, you dont understand what vertex/pixel shaders are for. i like to see you perform some of the oldchool perpixel effects. try the simple translation map with feedback effect. a simple lookup table which translate the pixels in the backbuffer becomes an utter nightmare to do in 3d hardware. using renders to texture, copying to system ram, aplly the translation, sending to vidram again, then blitting to the screen AND the offscreen render surface to do it again does not sound too fun nor fast. btw you could not even use pixel shaders for that and vertex shaders? heh, nope. there are many others, like TRUE radial blurs (none of that recursive crap). true you can do some nift things with pixel shaders, but they are not designed to replace direct access. last i checked you cant get fully random texture access using pixel shaders.

i see the 3d hardware marketing gurus got you pretty good with their naming convention.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
u cant compare pixelshaders to software its like comparing a dragster to a 4wd.

the reason directdraw has been stopped is cause with todays cards u can do 2d using a api like d3d or opengl far quicker than u can do 2d with directdraw

http://uk.geocities.com/sloppyturds/gotterdammerung.html
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course, anyone ever play a good game of 3d-Tetris? 2d graphics are simply another way to display a fake world, and they tend to be less confusing than 3d. Just my opinion.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zedzeek, directdraw was not stopped, merely not upgraded because there was no need to. the only ppl that think directdraw is completely dead are the ignorent. video card producers are not adding 2d features, so why upgrade the api when the old one is fine, and still usable with no problems. but you are right, with random direct per pixel access of video memory vs very linear combining of texture. i cant see how anyone could even imagine pixel shaders replacing direct access.

all you 3d morons, i propose a challenge. mimic a translation table effect (as seen in avs, giess, cthuga, gfader, etc) using only pixel shaders and d3d. dont forget the effect is done with feedback which means the last frame starts the next frame (no clears required or needed). when you can do this, then maybe you can say directdraw is dead.

Edited by - a person on February 16, 2002 1:49:58 AM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a person - I asked this as a response to a similar post, but perhaps you didn''t see it...

It''s been a very long time since I''ve used DirectDraw, so perhaps I don''t understand the whole picture, but it strikes me that the kinds of effects you are talking about would have been done by locking the DD surface and affecting the pixels.

How is this different than locking a DX8 surface (texture) and affecting the pixels? Performance-wise, you are doing the same thing (right??), so how are they different?

If that''s the case, I would assume that you would break even (between DX7 and DX8) on per-pixel effects that require locking and experience huge speedups in DX8 for effects that do not require locking. What am I missing?

As for your challenge, can you explain the effect in more detail? The way it''s described, I think it might be easy, but I''m not sure that I totally understand what you''re looking for...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites