Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Game Development (Technical)' started by zoombapup, Jul 28, 2009.
Unless the coder doesn't know their left hand from their right...
Wow... I think I'm gonna switch to GLee. Thanks for the tip!
This is actually untrue, despite MS's original intention to do it. Fortunately for all of us, IHVs found a way to work around this while still playing nicely with the new driver model, so the whole idea ultimately got scrapped.
Absolutely agree on that one! Those call should be in your game engine. And why write your own game engine when there are plenty of great free engines out there (including source code)? Just look at Ogre3D for example. But hey, if you guys have enough time to to write a game AND a game engine, that's fine by me .
Ogre is a graphics engine, not a game engine.
I've been around the "lets use an open source engine" block a few times. We ARE using an open source render engine (currently switching from Ogre to Horde3D), but thats not really the point. I want to be able to fully be in control of all aspects of the rendering, which means being able to do ANYTHING to the renderer. Ogre is great, but one thing I wouldnt recommend doing with Ogre, is to try and really grasp the renderer in it (beyond using it), unfortunately our use-case falls outside of its capability in some ways, specifically we need a particular form of instancing which requires a particular data structure to be passed to the shader. I know Ogre does instancing, thats not the point!
Anyway, suffice to say, we are NOT reinventing the wheel, we are merely wanting to understand the properties of it and to be in control of where the spokes are (dumb analogies
Thanks for the response guys, makes me feel a little better about GL now.
IF you are reinventing the wheel, you shouldn't feel ashamed or bad to do so, despite what others may say (they probably aren't in a position to reinvent a wheel themselves *har har*).
Car companies do it all the time. If they didn't, we would still use cart wheels
Yeah, I think customizability of an engine is definately a must, and that's the ideology I'm building Spin-X Engine around, i.e. you can use engine components that fit the requirements of your game and easily make your own components (e.g. shaders you mentioned) and have them also available in the game editor. And if that's not enough, you can always hack into the engine code as the last resort
Writing a games engine is never about reinventing the wheel, because there is no engine out there that works exactly how you'd want it to. Bending your own work processes to fit someone elses design might be worth the trouble or it might not be, but its definitely a concession in a vital area that you spend the rest of your life dealing with.
My advice has always been to write the core of a flexible system that does the stuff you want to do in the way you want to do it, and keep it well maintained so you can extend it as the need arises.
For example, most people will have their own timer class. Even though it will look a lot like everyone elses you should still write your own. But do it in a way that you need only write it yourself once ever.
Excellent news! I was going by a presentation I attended at Lionhead where the MS rep revealed the whole DX10 and Vista roadmap.
Couldn't agree more!
I tried using irrlicht since that appeared on the surface to do what I needed. Pretty soon I was back to my own core sub-systems because irrlicht was so buggy and support meant waiting for somebody to reply on the forums. I did look into Ogre but it seems way over-engineered.
Big Kahuna Reef on PC wasn't OpenGL. Every thing was done in system RAM (using dirty rects) & then blitted on to VRAM.
No idea about the Mac port.
I must have it confused with another game then.
Interestingly, Restoring Rhonda, Caribbean Hideaway and Fashion Solitaire are all listed as requiring DX, yet were created using TGB which suggests they're actually OpenGL based.
They're not in the top 100, but they are on the portal so presumably have gone through and passed the portal's QA.
I believe Torque can use DX on windows as well as OGL.
Have a look at Horde3D then, its way more lightweight than Ogre and seems reasonably sane, but uses GL.
The earlier engines use an OpenGL wrapper that translates the GL calls to d3d, the newer engines use an abstracted graphics interface which is cleaner (and although I've not profiled it, I'm assuming more efficient and than the wrapper too)
That said, Caribbean Hideaway is using OpenGL as the renderer
$pref::Video::displayDevice = "OpenGL";
Not sure whether the others are, but afaik OpenGL is the default device for TGB, but the Devs for the other games may have changed it, I cbb to check
$pref::Video::displayDevice = "OpenGL";
Looks good. May give it a go. Support and the licencing remain big issues. At least with home grown you have 24hr support access but then it does come down to are you developing technology or a game.
Yeah, developing a 3D game engine is loads of effort so it's good if you can ride on someone elses work. I have been now working on a game engine + editor full time for around 9 months and more I work, more work there appears to be
The chance you'll do it right with your own OpenGL game without going through massive QA is low.
If you've never heard anyone complaining, I'd like to disappoint you. A chance that your POTENTIAL player will report "a game not running on my computer due to opengl issue" is as high as conversion rate - that's 1%. That's why you've never heard it. Or it was reported as "game not running for me!!!!!!!111 help111"
No matter what engine you use, DX, OGL or something else you are never going to get around that. All games have issues and all games need to be supported.
I've released a few things that rely on OpenGL, and I only use OpenGL 1.x features. The few technical support questions I've received regarding graphics have all been resolved by updating drivers.
Now then, updating drivers may be too much for some people.