There is OpenGL and Direct3D so you dont have to program using the interfaces the GPU drivers would give you. It has to be higher-level than the API on a console cause it has to work for many different GPUs.

The API is the way it is, but normally you write wrappers around its objects ....so you wont see its arcane functions all the time.

Heres a good presentation, ...he talks a lot about why is openGL good/bad. (and rants a lot too).

BTW if you want to see a change you are free to talk to the ARB memers and/or be there on the meetings.

Haha. I did rant a little more than I probably should have in that talk. smile.png

All the rant-points were legit.

(Thanks for those great talks BTW! ....I really enjoyed the one about game engines and the 8-hour game. I wish I saw that a few years ago:))

Otherwise - well all anyone has to do is point out all of the online clamouring about the ancient binding model as evidence.

desire) there would still need to be a lower-level layer under it. Considering OpenGL to be too low-level doesn't mean that something is wrong with OpenGL, it means that something is wrong with the choice you've made and that you need to back off and rethink.

I am low level man too, but there seem maybe two kind of low level

1) RAW low level when you just have strict acces to hardware

2) some managed lov level when you got a lot of complrx idioms of opaque functions to use to get low lewel things done

I am not sure (I do not know OGL too much yet) but it seem to me

that OGL maybe gone into second way, This opaque low level is not a thing that i would be crazy for, (thats probably why i must call it 'ugly and strange', though i like simple c flavor of it )

I would say there isn't just two levels, "high" and "low", there are many layers of abstraction, and if they are "high" or "low" depends on the context.