DirectX vs OpenGL

[SlackerITGuy]

Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX - Wolfire Games Blog

Very interesting read.

Didn't know tessellation has been an OpenGL extension for three years.

 

[FuturDreamz]

cool.

 

[jim84]

Mac and Linux as markets for games is not really a good argument... They are not gaming platforms. Sure they can play games, and they are a relatively untapped market. Probably largely due to gamers using Windows or Consoles. Linux is not a realistic platform for games because there are so many flavors, it's all over the place. Linux is better for servers for games.

 

[Dinesh]

Using OpenGL here as well.

 

[FuturDreamz]

turns out there's and OpenGL wrapper for Java, so Java apps can access OpenGL while staying hardware independent.

 

[sygnus21]

While I understand his point, it kind of sounds like sour grapes. Yeah I understand the need for competition, but one standard would be nice and easy for all as well. I'm not saying it has to be Microsoft but...

And while his point about half of Windows users still using XP and thus missing out on the benefits of DX10 or 11 is true to a certain point, (XP's been around for about 9 years), it's not necessarily going to be true for "gamers" as most "gamers" are also PC enthusiasts who are ready and willing to make the jump to Vista or Win 7 now (if they haven't already done so already) so I think that cancels that argument.

Just my two cents.

 

[Coolness]

Mac and Linux as markets for games is not really a good argument... They are not gaming platforms. Sure they can play games, and they are a relatively untapped market. Probably largely due to gamers using Windows or Consoles. Linux is not a realistic platform for games because there are so many flavors, it's all over the place. Linux is better for servers for games.

You wanna know why mac and linux (such as Ubuntu) dont have games for them? Cause of microsoft. They almost have a monopoly, and thus, if a game making firm like Blizzard makes a game for linux, microsoft will not tolerate this, and tell them to F*** off. Bye Bye money for Blizzard. Im not saying OGL is better than DX, since i dont know about theese things, but open-source is always going to win over sharaware. Take FireFox, the have a open code, and look what a magnificent browser it has become. So has Google Chrome.

 

[Everlong]

A lot of that stuff is inaccurate. A couple of things from the marketing campaign bit:

Many gamers now think that switching from DirectX 9 to DirectX 10 magically transforms graphics from stupidly dark to normal (as in the comparison above), or from Halo 1 to Crysis.

Maybe the Crysis screenshots were pre-release, but even if you compare a real DX10 screenshot from Crysis to Halo 1, the difference is still huge.

Game journalists proved that there was no difference between Crysis DX9 and DX10, and that its "DX10" features worked fine with DX9 by tweaking a config file.

This only worked in the pre-release demo as well. Like yea the lighting in "DX 10" XP was different, but you never got the DX 10 textures.

 

[fseal]

The reason DirectX exists is many fold. But mainly two points. 1) OpenGL at the time was nearly DEAD. It had stagnated for SO LONG, it was not keeping up with the advances in consumer level hardware. And even after Direct3D was long in use they STILL could not get OGL 2.0 ratified. There was a serious danger of a grahoics lib fragmentation by vendor (anyone remember GLide?)

One of the chairmen stood up during a meeting once and said that if they don't get 2.0 ratified soon (ghod I don't know how many years it was being hashed out) they might as well just close up shop.

Secondly OpenGL is a graphics lib. Direct X is a suite of libraries for everything needed for game development. It spans a MUCH wider area than OpenGL does. 2d/3d graphics, 3d sound mixing, Game control input, networking and so forth.

Lately OpenGL has finally gotten back on track and are looking like a viable platform again, even innovating some. But thier own sluggishness and snails-pace efforts in years past have earned thier problems now...

 

[Coolness]

The reason DirectX exists is many fold. But mainly two points. 1) OpenGL at the time was nearly DEAD. It had stagnated for SO LONG, it was not keeping up with the advances in consumer level hardware. And even after Direct3D was long in use they STILL could not get OGL 2.0 ratified. There was a serious danger of a grahoics lib fragmentation by vendor (anyone remember GLide?)

One of the chairmen stood up during a meeting once and said that if they don't get 2.0 ratified soon (ghod I don't know how many years it was being hashed out) they might as well just close up shop.

Secondly OpenGL is a graphics lib. Direct X is a suite of libraries for everything needed for game development. It spans a MUCH wider area than OpenGL does. 2d/3d graphics, 3d sound mixing, Game control input, networking and so forth.

Lately OpenGL has finally gotten back on track and are looking like a viable platform again, even innovating some. But thier own sluggishness and snails-pace efforts in years past have earned thier problems now...

OpenGL is non-profit, DirectX is not. Huge corporations down, open-source FTW

 

[GatoSoft]

I also like open source software but... I don't know why people never mentioned that in most cases DirectX performs lots faster than OpenGL.
I'm gamer since 1990 and PC gamer since 1996 and since that old times I always had lots more FPS with DirectX than with OpenGL.
For example, last week I've tried Dolphin, an Wii emulator for PC (just for test purposes) with some Wii games that a friend of mine have and emulator's devs said in forums that they're focusing on OpenGL plug-in more than in Direct3D because an stupid bug in Direct3D's plug-in they don't want to fix, arguing that OpenGL is best for unknown reasons, but... anyway, the thing is that with same graphics capabilities and also in the same game, I've got around 30~40 FPS more with Direct3D than with OpenGL, making Direct3D that lots of games can be playable at full FPS in my hardware (see my home PC in my specs) and getting OpenGL at just 20~30 FPS... that means half speed gameplay, man!
This is just an example, but I've experienced it a lot in the past, even with commercial software and benchmarks, not only in my hardware, it have happened in every hardware I've tested. Since the old SiS 5596 I used to use in 1996 to the GeForce GTX295 SLI that is using a friend of mine with updated drivers and everything. :shock:
I don't know if somebody experienced the same or it's just my bad luck.