Direct3D vs. OpenGL

This is a discussion on Direct3D vs. OpenGL within the Game Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Just offering up a question here because I want to hear the opinions of the experienced. What do you think ...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    126

    Direct3D vs. OpenGL

    Just offering up a question here because I want to hear the opinions of the experienced. What do you think will happen to Direct3D and OpenGL in the future? Do you think Direct3D will die and go to you-know-where, and will be replaced by OpenGL? Might OpenGL and Direct3D be merged(DirectGL, maybe)? Will Microsoft eventually come out with a good version of Direct3D? Other possibilities? I'd really like to hear soem good opinions on this.

  2. #2
    Programming Sex-God Polymorphic OOP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,078
    If anything Direct3D will replace OpenGL in terms of its use in commercial games, but that's almost as unlikely as the opposite.

    Direct3D offers a more object oriented approach and has a lot more built-in funcitonality as opposed to OpenGL. Direct3D is updated often and also has the benefit of being a part of the DirectX SDK which includes API's for not just graphics but for input, music, etc. They also are very open with beta's and offer detailed documentation.

    But as long as DirectX is a windows system component, you are not going to see Direct3D completely "take over" the gaming world. Portability is still of great importance! The fact that Direct3D is windows only limits it greatly.

    Microsoft come out with a Direct3D that's good? They already have. Direct3D is a great API and has been for several versions!

    Don't expect either API to take over. You'll probably see Direct3D being used a lot more, but OpenGL will be there as well.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    160
    I hear people talking about API all the time and I've had it... What is a API ?
    Well english isn't my first language, (it's instead a useless language called danish which only 5 milion people speak!!) so if you think my grammar SUCKS (it does by the way) than you're more then welcome to correct me.
    Hell I might even learn something

  4. #4
    Programming Sex-God Polymorphic OOP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,078
    Application Programming Interface

    It's basically just a collection of libraries and headers that you use for certain things -- IE Audio, graphics, etc.

  5. #5
    Has a Masters in B.S.
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    2,267
    i disagree on some points,

    >
    If anything Direct3D will replace OpenGL in terms of its use in commercial games, but that's almost as unlikely as the opposite.
    <

    i strongly disagree here, from what i see the opposite seems to be happening though very slowly...

    >Direct3D is updated often

    so is GL now.

    >has the benefit of being a part of the DirectX SDK

    GL will work just as well with it, and when OpenML is released this will no longer be an issue.

    >The fact that Direct3D is windows only limits it greatly.

    very very true. i think this may be the thing that kills it if anything since the Linux Desktop is on the rise Direct-X will begin to lose its foothold, since portability will be paramount.

    >Don't expect either API to take over.

    exactly, the fact is Windows rules the desktop, and as long as it does Direct-X will be there.
    ADVISORY: This users posts are rated CP-MA, for Mature Audiences only.

  6. #6
    Banned master5001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Visalia, CA, USA
    Posts
    3,685
    Direct X is very nice to use. Nonetheless, OpenGL isn't exactly are bear to use. I have a friend who put it best: "Saying Direct X is better than OpenGL is like saying C++ is better than C." Some will argue that one is better than the other but in the end it is obvious that the biggest difference is platform independance other than that you can accomplish pretty much the same thing on both.

  7. #7
    -xp
    Guest
    Originally posted by Polymorphic OOP
    GL will work just as well with it, and when OpenML is released this will no longer be an issue
    fill me in on OpenML

  8. #8
    Programming Sex-God Polymorphic OOP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,078
    Originally posted by no-one
    i strongly disagree here, from what i see the opposite seems to be happening though very slowly...
    Not really, look at games such as warcraft III -- where if you're on a PC they don't even give you an option to switch from Direct3D to OpenGL when running the executable, only from command line arguments, and even then they try not to tell you about it. Why? Because it's much easier to do certain effects in Direct3D that are a standard part of the API where-as on OpenGL they are not and so they are able to do more with Direct3D in the same period of time. Even Carmack seems to be slowly warming up to Direct3D, and that says a lot considering his previous stance on "OpenGL vs Direct3D." OpenGL used to be the way to go, but that's usually not the case anymore.

    While there are more and more commercial games that emphasize Direct3D over OpenGL, there are very few that do the opposite (unless, of course, they are on an OS other than windows). As long as Windows is the most widely used OS for gaming, Direct3D will most-likely just keep rising in popularity.

    Originally posted by no-one
    so is GL now.
    An update does not mean they update a lot now. In the amount of time that DirectX updates several times (which includes all of the APIs, not just graphics), OpenGL updates once, and in each of those DirectX updates a considerable amount is added and modified.

    Originally posted by no-one
    GL will work just as well with it, and when OpenML is released this will no longer be an issue.
    That's still nothing compared to what DirectX already has.


    ----------------


    I didn't mean to make my post sound like a bash at OpenGL, as I use OpenGL a lot, but it does have a lot of faults. Over the next few years, you probably won't see it being used as much as it had been 2 or 3 years ago.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    126
    I personally do not like frequent updates, unless there is something seriously wrong with the API, because a lot of compatibility issues arise, and it really becomes more of a hassle than a benefit. I like the way that OpenGL has been managed as far as updates.

  10. #10
    Has a Masters in B.S.
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    2,267
    ok peeps, i didn't want this to be an agruement, so cool your heels a bit.

    >fill me in on OpenML

    "OpenML is a cross-platform standard programming environment for capturing, transporting, processing, displaying, and synchronizing digital media (2D and 3D graphics, audio and video processing, I/O, and networking)."

    it will use an "Extended" version of OpenGL 2.0 for Graphics display. it also has an OpenGL ES( Embedded Systems ) API for working on embedded systems.

    http://www.khronos.org

    >
    Even Carmack seems to be slowly warming up to Direct3D, and that says a lot considering his previous stance on "OpenGL vs Direct3D." OpenGL used to be the way to go, but that's usually not the case anymore.
    <

    that was before 3D-Labs pushed a massive movement to update and OpenGL 2.0 was announced, i think he has since changed his mind as have many others upset with the lack of significant updates to GL.

    >
    only from command line arguments, and even then they try not to tell you about it. Why?
    <

    question: why do they even implement a GL renderer then?

    >
    Because it's much easier to do certain effects in Direct3D that are a standard part of the API where-as on OpenGL they are not and so they are able to do more with Direct3D in the same period of time.
    <

    In the context of vendor specific extentions, yes, this is the sad truth till recently, the sleeping giant has awakened, things are changing and fast.

    >
    While there are more and more commercial games that emphasize Direct3D over OpenGL, there are very few that do the opposite (unless, of course, they are on an OS other than windows).
    <

    think of it this way, even if games still use Direct-3D as the main renderer they are now supporting an OpenGL renderer as well, where they didnt before, why? to get their people used to the API. game developers would have to be blind not to see whats comming. This is why i make the statement "Very Slowly". the change will be slow and i think uless somthing significant changes we'll see a pretty even distribution of games using these api's over the next 2 years.

    >An update does not mean they update a lot now.

    try 2 in less than a year! and there will be an estimated 6 more by the middle of next year!! at wich time any advantage Direct-3D has concerning OpenGL vendor specific extentions will be null, unless MS changes its update plans which i think it already has.

    >That's still nothing compared to what DirectX already has.

    how bout being able to output to, or run on, cell phones, TV's, PDA, anything and everything, thats just for openers. it has some serious backing already.
    ADVISORY: This users posts are rated CP-MA, for Mature Audiences only.

  11. #11
    Programming Sex-God Polymorphic OOP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,078
    Originally posted by no-one
    why do they even implement a GL renderer then?
    Because OpenGL is still good and will always be good. Some accelerators run better with OpenGL than in Direct3D (some visa-versa), and also because of portability. The same reasons you'd support multitle ways of rendering any other time.

    Originally posted by no-one
    think of it this way, even if games still use Direct-3D as the main renderer they are now supporting an OpenGL renderer as well, where they didnt before
    Actually, you see more of the opposite -- games which used to support OpenGL now support Direct3D and OpenGL, and even put an emphasis on Direct3D over OpenGL.

  12. #12
    Has a Masters in B.S.
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    2,267
    > and also because of portability.

    thats the point!
    support for OpenGL will become a must and if Direct-X remains platform dependant it will lose favor.

    >
    Actually, you see more of the opposite -- games which used to support OpenGL now support Direct3D and OpenGL, and even put an emphasis on Direct3D over OpenGL.
    <

    your opinion vs. mine, i see things differently.
    ADVISORY: This users posts are rated CP-MA, for Mature Audiences only.

  13. #13
    Programming Sex-God Polymorphic OOP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,078
    Normally I'd agree that portability is a bigee, but unfortunately, in gaming, it's not. Windows is what most gamers use and so the fact that DirectX is windows only isn't as big of a drawback as some might think. For that reason I think OpenGL will always be an option but will not be the suggested choice for rendering from the developer, unless they actually do come through with a lot of updates. For now I personally think Direct3D is on the rise but OpenGL does have the chance of coming through later on, though in the 2 to 5 year range I don't see it happening.

  14. #14
    nugget_head
    Guest
    i've used both; however, i've used directx alot more than opengl.
    in my opinion, or is that (IMO) since i'm online?, if one is going to "fade out", it will be OpenGL. i doubt either will in the near future, as both have been used to create some incredible games. anything that can be done in DirectX can be done in OpenGL, and vice versa, but with a backing like Microsoft you have to believe DirectX is in it for the long haul.

  15. #15
    Shadow12345
    Guest
    i'd be surprised if anyone in this thread has done extensive programming with direct3d and opengl or done any game programming across multiple platforms. what does this mean? it means the opinions voiced are probably so skeptical they're not worth listening to. but that's just my opinion.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Direct3D vs OpenGL Interview
    By Darklighter in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-25-2006, 08:37 AM
  2. OpenGL Window
    By Morgul in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-15-2005, 12:34 PM
  3. OpenGL .dll vs video card dll
    By Silvercord in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-12-2003, 06:57 PM
  4. C++ on opengl & direct3d
    By SAMSAM in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 08:34 PM
  5. opengl code not working
    By Unregistered in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-14-2002, 09:01 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21